mike1960
Well Known Member
I wonder if one of the DD legal experts could clear a query up for me.
I am currently attending my DD awareness course having been daft enough to drink and drive and then blown 52. My last session is this Saturday, and this question has been bothering me all week.
One on the instructors was talking about the dire consequences of being charged with being in control of a vehicle whilst disqualified. The examples that she cited included:-
All of these seem ludicrous to me, because of (respectively) not a road vehicle, no intent to drive & no intent to drive. Any clarification or comment on this would be gratefully received.
Anyway, this got me thinking about the legal distinction between a disqualified driver and a non-driver. For instance, a disqualified driver goes out for a drink with some friends and they have a non-drinking driver to take them all home. On the way home the driver stops for some reason, turns off the engine but leaves the keys in the ignition. The police arrive and, according to my instructor, the disqualified driver is not only guilty of being in charge, but is now drunk in charge. So, my question is why are the other inebriated occupants not also guilty of being drunk in charge?
Another situation, same as above but instead of a mate driving a taxi is called. All other circumstances are the same and there is clearly no intent to drive at all – is this illegal?
One final example – what about the same as above but you are now in a bus – is this illegal.
I have to say that if true, this all seems remarkably badly thought out.
All comments welcomed - thanks.
Mike
I am currently attending my DD awareness course having been daft enough to drink and drive and then blown 52. My last session is this Saturday, and this question has been bothering me all week.
One on the instructors was talking about the dire consequences of being charged with being in control of a vehicle whilst disqualified. The examples that she cited included:-
- Operating a fork lift truck in the course of your work in a warehouse
- Sitting in a car at a petrol station whilst the driver fills up, leaving the keys in the ignition
- Cleaning your car or van, while it is on a drive and you are in possession of the keys
All of these seem ludicrous to me, because of (respectively) not a road vehicle, no intent to drive & no intent to drive. Any clarification or comment on this would be gratefully received.
Anyway, this got me thinking about the legal distinction between a disqualified driver and a non-driver. For instance, a disqualified driver goes out for a drink with some friends and they have a non-drinking driver to take them all home. On the way home the driver stops for some reason, turns off the engine but leaves the keys in the ignition. The police arrive and, according to my instructor, the disqualified driver is not only guilty of being in charge, but is now drunk in charge. So, my question is why are the other inebriated occupants not also guilty of being drunk in charge?
Another situation, same as above but instead of a mate driving a taxi is called. All other circumstances are the same and there is clearly no intent to drive at all – is this illegal?
One final example – what about the same as above but you are now in a bus – is this illegal.
I have to say that if true, this all seems remarkably badly thought out.
All comments welcomed - thanks.
Mike
Last edited: