Failure to provide charge

Convicted Driver Insurance

newbie_DD

New Member
Hi

Hopefully someone can help me. I do have a good lawyer who has explained this all to me, but I wanted to know if there is anyone who has experience of additional charges being added to the defendant once they have already been charged?

Current situation:

Was smashed off the road by a suspected drunk driver, complete write off - other driver refused breathalyser at scene and was arrested.

They seemed fine, but I sustained several injuries as did my daughter, a minor.

Police officer asked me for a brief statement at the scene.

I instructed a top PI firm (specialists, not the usual claims handling teams), who have been excellent. It's quite bad atm for me, I'm struggling with work, I'm slow with responses, make spelling mistakes and my head is my biggest concern.

Had no word from police after the crash apart from asking for my details at the scene, checking my insurance, and breathalysing me. Chased the RTC team repeatedly as I felt it odd that no one was taking our witness statements, especially as my daughter is a minor. Eventually managed to have an evidence folder setup, so I can upload our written statements, crash photos, and a video showing road conditions were good.

Local area, and a friend in emergency services said the defendant is known to the police for this type of offence.

Six weeks after the event, the OIC (officer in charge) calls to say the defendant is being charged with 'failure to provide a specimen'; he wants to add dangerous driving to the list of charges and needs to come and take our statements. He was the arresting officer, accompanied the defendant to hospital, where the defendant refused to allow the doctors to take blood samples. He obtained signatures from the medical team stating there was no medical reason for the refusal to provide a specimen as he wanted the defendant off the road. He thanked us for the detailed plan and other evidence, and said he will simply copy and paste our statements and get our signatures. He wants to make sure the defendant is off the road.

20 mins after the call I receive an email from the OIC stating his sergeant has confirmed the overarching charge is 'failure to provide a specimen', so they do not require statements from us. Nothing further needed, and happy to take questions. This struck me as very strange.

I asked why dangerous driving cannot be added and will the CPS view all our evidence and statements? I also mentioned that surely it is new information to the police that I have serious injuries and this makes the case for dangerous driving even stronger?

A barrister friend of mine has said this is ridiculous and it is quite clearly a case of dangerous driving. He suggested the lesser offence is the path with the least resistance and this ensures conviction without the additional effort of a dangerous driving charge. He also said the joke of it all is that the police will probably use my evidence to convict, but not require a witness statement from either my daughter or I as, technically, there probably isn't a victim in a 'failure to provide' charge.

Lawyer has advised that, whilst not an ideal situation, the case should be strong enough to demonstrate negligence.

My issues:

- I know the lawyers for the defendant will claim that clearly it was not dangerous driving otherwise the police would have prosecuted for it. And that this might impact my PI claim. My lawyer is very positive but I am more cynical about the end result.

- Not vindictive, but this person nearly killed me and my daughter. We were broadsided whilst on the main road passing a give way and they were going approx. 45-50mph. If we had a smaller car we'd be gone. I do not want this person driving for a very long time. Looking online, there are lots of lawyers specialising in quashing 'failure to provide a specimen' charges and I'm struggling to relax on this one. Am I fighting a losing battle, or worth pursuing the dangerous driving charge?

- I have asked the police to confirm if CPS and/or magistrate will see our evidence and statements as they are pretty damning. There was nothing left of the front of the other vehicle (commercial size and upside down), and the insurers have said it is a clear non-fault claim on my part. But this was deliberate dangerous driving and could have killed if I was in a smaller car. What joy can I expect from pushing the police for an answer?

- Are the CPS likely to accept my evidence and investigate if I get through to them?

- Reviewing the RTOA 1988 s.1 states an offence under s.2 can only be charged if an NIP has been given at the time or within 14 days of the alleged offence, ref. Bentley v Dickinson. However, the defendant has to prove no NIP given, and the CPS are not bound to s.1 if the defendant 'caused an accident at the time of the offence, or immediately afterwards' that they were aware of. Does this mean that the police/CPS can still charge for the offence or add it to the list of charges for the impending court date even though it is now outside the 14 day time limit?

Sorry if I'm not coherent at the moment, or have misunderstood the RTOA, my head is still cloudy and long thought processes aren't that easy. I'm taking ages to write and check this before posting!

Hopefully someone can offer some helpful advice. Thanks.
 
- Reviewing the RTOA 1988 s.1 states an offence under s.2 can only be charged if an NIP has been given at the time or within 14 days of the alleged offence, ref. Bentley v Dickinson. However, the defendant has to prove no NIP given, and the CPS are not bound to s.1 if the defendant 'caused an accident at the time of the offence, or immediately afterwards' that they were aware of. Does this mean that the police/CPS can still charge for the offence or add it to the list of charges for the impending court date even though it is now outside the 14 day time limit?

Sorry if I'm not coherent at the moment, or have misunderstood the RTOA, my head is still cloudy and long thought processes aren't that easy. I'm taking ages to write and check this before posting!

Hopefully someone can offer some helpful advice. Thanks.
I'm not sure if perhaps you're getting a little confused between the Road Traffic Offenders Act and the Road Traffic Act - they are two different pieces of legislation.

'Dangerous Driving' and 'Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving' are both 'triable either way' offences, meaning they carry a potential prison sentence. The 'Notice of Intended Prosecution' is not required for them, and there's no time limit for laying a charge on those two offences.

The matter of convincing the police to pursue those charges is more difficult to answer. If they or the CPS don't want to charge they can't be forced to. You can sometimes convince them by applying tactful pressure via letters/telephone calls or even by contacting your local MP. But I'm afraid there aren't many guarantees to be made there. A private prosecution would be the only other option, but those are difficult and expensive.
 
I'm not sure if perhaps you're getting a little confused between the Road Traffic Offenders Act and the Road Traffic Act - they are two different pieces of legislation.

'Dangerous Driving' and 'Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving' are both 'triable either way' offences, meaning they carry a potential prison sentence. The 'Notice of Intended Prosecution' is not required for them, and there's no time limit for laying a charge on those two offences.

The matter of convincing the police to pursue those charges is more difficult to answer. If they or the CPS don't want to charge they can't be forced to. You can sometimes convince them by applying tactful pressure via letters/telephone calls or even by contacting your local MP. But I'm afraid there aren't many guarantees to be made there. A private prosecution would be the only other option, but those are difficult and expensive.
Apologies, what I said is slightly incorrect - dangerous driving is applicable to a NIP, but not serious injury as far as I recall - but as you have said following an accident there is no strict requirement for one and there is still no statutory time limit.
 
Hi,

If he failed to provide this will all be shown on the officers bodycam footage which will show evidentally on what scale he was intoxicated.

In the end they will be banned from driving.

I would think that the way you have been crashed into & the aggravating factor you were with your child at the time will turn it into a big aggravating factor.

Let them face court see what the outcome is if not happy with what is handed down, complain.

I am glad that you both are ok, God bless.

Kind regards,





Stu
 
Many thanks to you all for your responses and advice.

I am still waiting on any form of response from the police. It's been a wall of silence since I asked a few questions.
 
The matter of convincing the police to pursue those charges is more difficult to answer. If they or the CPS don't want to charge they can't be forced to. You can sometimes convince them by applying tactful pressure via letters/telephone calls or even by contacting your local MP. But I'm afraid there aren't many guarantees to be made there. A private prosecution would be the only other option, but those are difficult and expensive.

The police and the CPS have a case here were they can get the defendant banned and convicted for failing to provide very easily. However, to nail the defendant with dangerous driving the likelihood is a trial at Court that costs the tax payer money and there is no guarantee of a dangerous driving conviction at the end.

The CPS are under massive scrutiny to only run with cases that they are likely to win. In this scenario, they are simply having one bite of the cherry, instead of two because the likely outcome will remain unchanged - conviction, ban, community punishment.

CJ
 
The police and the CPS have a case here were they can get the defendant banned and convicted for failing to provide very easily. However, to nail the defendant with dangerous driving the likelihood is a trial at Court that costs the tax payer money and there is no guarantee of a dangerous driving conviction at the end.

The CPS are under massive scrutiny to only run with cases that they are likely to win. In this scenario, they are simply having one bite of the cherry, instead of two because the likely outcome will remain unchanged - conviction, ban, community punishment.

CJ
I wish the police had told me this. I would have stopped bothering them ages ago!

I’m just asking them to confirm if my photos and video will be used as evidence. Because, although this is a failure to provide charge, the defendant is likely to claim icy conditions with regard to the accident, when I have proved that not to be the case.
 
Whilst I sympathise with what you’ve gone through, I’d let just this one go TBH and allow them to do their jobs. As CJ says it’s the realistic change of a conviction which is the deciding factor here, and if it’s retribution you’re seeking them the avenue to pursue this is via insurance or even the civil courts if you’re unsatisfied.
 
Whilst I sympathise with what you’ve gone through, I’d let just this one go TBH and allow them to do their jobs. As CJ says it’s the realistic change of a conviction which is the deciding factor here, and if it’s retribution you’re seeking them the avenue to pursue this is via insurance or even the civil courts if you’re unsatisfied.
Yeah, I was thinking the same. I'm not after retribution in a vindictive sense. Just to be back where I was pre-accident. I'm pretty badly hurt still, and can't drive. As long as this person has a massive wake up call then I'm happy with that.

It's probably the cynic in me, but I just can't bear the thought of attending the hearing and listening to them managing to get off the hook somehow.

Thanks for listening. It's kind of cathartic just talking it through on here too.
 
Fair enough, I can appreciate that, Newbie.

But believe me, they will get (or are currently already even getting) that wake-up call; whether they face the additional charge or not.

It may not quite be jail time, but trust me when I state how much they have majorly inconvenienced themselves (and not only you); for a considerable period of time.

Being a High Risk Offender (which by default they now become, having foolishly opted not to provide a sample) only compounds that. In short, it basically means that they won’t be able to drive so much as a moped again until they can prove to a DVLA-appointed medic that they are mentally fit and sober enough to drive again. And even then, the likelihood is that that will be subject to a year’s probationary license should they pass, before having to repeat the process again, annually, for as long as the DVLA feel they must.

And that medical is no walk in the park, either. It is extremely strict, and grants the medic authority to go over their entire medical history (at liberty to unearth any discrepancy that may be lurking within). If they admit to having taken so much as a paracetamol more than they should have, they risk being revoked again. They will have to prove sobriety for at least a month beforehand (the CDT blood test as part of this medical - which is both very accurate and extremely sensitive - means that they have to go sober for several weeks before the test, or they will fail).

In fact such is the grief and worry the medical causes HRO offenders - self-inflictedly of course - it even has its own dedicated sub-forum on here!

This is probably all scant consolation, I know. And few DUI cases deserve much (if any) sympathy. No one here would ask for that. But please do take some solace in that whomever did this to you won’t forget what they have done to their family and social lives, their mobility, their reputation, and in many cases perhaps even their career in a hurry. Just because they haven’t been told not to pass go nor not collect £200 doesn’t mean they won’t suffer!

In any case, I wish you all the best with your recovery. This place doesn’t often hear from the true victims often, so thanks for sharing your story. It serves only to remind and underline to us all how foolish and selfish an act drink driving truly is.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough, I can appreciate that, Newbie.

But believe me, they will get (or are currently already even getting) that wake-up call; whether they face the additional charge or not.

It may not quite be jail time, but trust me when I state how much they have majorly inconvenienced themselves (and not only you); for a considerable period of time.

Being a High Risk Offender (which by default they now become, having foolishly opted not to provide a sample) only compounds that. In short, it basically means that they won’t be able to drive so much as a moped again until they can prove to a DVLA-appointed medic that they are mentally fit and sober enough to drive again. And even then, the likelihood is that that will be subject to a year’s probationary license should they pass, before having to repeat the process again, annually, for as long as the DVLA feel they must.

And that medical is no walk in the park, either. It is extremely strict, and grants the medic authority to go over their entire medical history (at liberty to unearth any discrepancy that may be lurking within). If they admit to having taken so much as a paracetamol more than they should have, they risk being revoked again. They will have to prove sobriety for at least a month beforehand (the CDT blood test as part of this medical - which is both very accurate and extremely sensitive - means that they have to go sober for several weeks before the test, or they will fail).

In fact such is the grief and worry the medical causes HRO offenders - self-inflictedly of course - it even has its own dedicated sub-forum on here!

This is probably all scant consolation, I know. And few DUI cases deserve much (if any) sympathy. No one here would ask for that. But please do take some solace in that whomever did this to you won’t forget what they have done to their family and social lives, their mobility, their reputation, and in many cases perhaps even their career in a hurry. Just because they haven’t been told not to pass go nor not collect £200 doesn’t mean they won’t suffer!

In any case, I wish you all the best with your recovery. This place doesn’t often hear from the true victims often, so thanks for sharing your story. It serves only to remind and underline to us all how foolish and selfish an act drink driving truly is.
That's a tough road ahead for sure.

Interestingly, my mother is an alcoholic. I've witnessed first hand the destructive power alcohol has. I don't do alcohol as a result. I was doing half the speed limit, but that evening it was like being hit hard from the past. Hard to explain, and I'm sure a psychiatrist would have a field day with that, but sometimes you'll get hit no matter how careful you are.

Funnily enough, one of the first things I did was to pray for this person. Because all I know is you've got to have some serious issues to go and do this sort of thing. No judgement intended, or moral high ground, I just really hope this person finds peace and gets better.
 
A lot of those convicted of DUI are going through something pretty bad at the time. Even the briefest nose about this place will tell you this.

Selfish and thoughtless an act as it is, and with no real excuse, there is however quite often a woeful back story. For me life was hell at the time and I wasn’t thinking straight, certainly not straight enough to comprehend or appreciate how I was about to make it all a hundred times worse. The only good thing to come out of it in my case (besides no one getting hurt) was that it completely altered my relationship with alcohol. I avoid it completely now and have done for some considerable time.
 
A lot of those convicted of DUI are going through something pretty bad at the time. Even the briefest nose about this place will tell you this.

Selfish and thoughtless an act as it is, and with no real excuse, there is however quite often a woeful back story. For me life was hell at the time and I wasn’t thinking straight, certainly not straight enough to comprehend or appreciate how I was about to make it all a hundred times worse. The only good thing to come out of it in my case (besides no one getting hurt) was that it completely altered my relationship with alcohol. I avoid it completely now and have done for some considerable time.
Well done for doing that. You have to be brave to face it head on. I often think of alcohol as the silent killer. It sneaks in the back door and you wonder how you even got to such a dark place. Unfortunately, for this person at least, they have not heeded prior warnings and it looks like they'll be facing a far worse long term outlook.
 
The best analogy for alcohol I have read is that of ‘The Pitcher Plant’, in a self-help book I recommended on here not long ago. Not unlike a Venus fly trap, flies are still attracted to it no matter the dangers they are fully aware of, lured in by its sweet nectar. But the (pitcher-shaped) foliage - sweet as it indeed is - is both sticky, and sweet/very moreish at the same time. The more the flies gorge upon the nectar, the further down they slip, and even though they can see the dead and rotting corpses of the flies in the pool beneath they cannot stop gorgeing on the nectar, under the mistaken belief that they can still stop and fly away at any time.

It’s only when they are too fat to fly and too bloated and stuck to escape the sticky leaves do they realise that they too are now doomed.
 
You seem like a lovely and intelligent person, I am deeply sorry you and your daughter have been affected by the reckless acts of a drink driver.


To mention something at the outset - I would be wary about the promises of PI lawyers. Even though the guy certainly has a civil case to answer, it should be questioned as to the feasibility of the defendant to pay, if he has no assets or housing (clearly not a car) then no matter how good your civil case against him would be, it wouldn't matter as he would be locked up and declared bankrupt.

Just a few other thoughts on your legal questions -

- I am surprised, like like others have commented, that he isn't being prosecuted for dangerous driving. He will, at the very least be charged under 4(2) of the RTA.

- This offence has sentencing guidelines, with failing to provide a specimen (makes him a high risk offender) and hitting another car and causing injury being, among others, aggravating factors. These aggravating factors can put him in prison for up to 2 years.

- It is for the CPS to build the case against against the defendant, if they wish for evidence from yourself they will ask for it. It is not possible for private persons to bring a criminal case against an individual (this is the role of the state). They probably are already accounting for these aggravating factors It seems pretty evident already what has occurred from you brief statement at the scene.
 
Hi again everyone!

I thought I’d provide an update on this as it’s still rumbling on.

The defendant didn’t turn up to the initial hearing. Then at the next revised hearing entered a Not Guilty plea. The trial will start next year. Charge of failure to provide, and possibly driving without due care and attention.

It’s incredibly frustrating that someone would do this as it is now an unnecessary delay. This person is still driving around since the crash and clearly does not care about me at all.

Does anyone have an idea as to what is likely to happen?
 
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top