In charge while disqualified, or drunk, or both query

[mike1960]

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:-

• 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

 

[SeanJoyceStephensons]

Your instructor is correct, up to a point. In all the circumstances you describe, the inebriated passengers, whether disqualfied or not and whether in a taxi or private vehicle would, according to the letter of the law, be "in charge". Indeed there is even case law that says a person who had keys in his pocket to a vehicle parked up to half a mile away is still, technically, "in charge".

However, section 5(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 says:
"It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b) above to prove that at the time he is alleged to have committed the offence the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine remained likely to exceed the prescribed limit"

In real life it will often be obvious that there is no likelihood of a person driving the vehicle, despite being "in charge" of it, whilst over the legal limit. We have to trust the police and prosecutors to take a sensible approach to such scenarios. If they don't then we have to trust the English criminal justice system to apply the statutory defence allowed under section 5(2) to the facts of each case in a way that is just and fair.

 

[mike1960]

Many thanks for clearing that up.