Our client failed to notify change of her address as registered keeper of a vehicle she owned, and when the vehicle was caught speeding, the notice requiring the keeper to identify the driver was sent to the wrong address. She was summonsed for failing to identify the driver, an offence which carries six penalty points. Our client also failed to receive the summons sent to her old address and was found guilty in her absence, was fined and had six points imposed. We had the conviction set aside and entered a not guilty plea on her behalf relying on the defence that it had not been practicable for her to respond to the notice. The prosecution said it was her responsibility to notify DVLA of the change so she could not rely upon the defence. Come the morning of the trial the prosecution offered no evidence and the charge was dismissed. Our client's legal costs were paid from central funds.
Our client stopped at a pub on his way home and drank two pints. He was stopped by Police. He failed the road side test and later supplied breath specimens which showed that he was 10mg over the legal limit, and 5mg over the level at which drink drive offences are prosecuted. Two friends who had been in the pub mentioned that an acquaintance had poured a double vodka into his pint assuming that our client would not be driving. An analyst we instructed calculated that but for the double vodka his sample at the time of driving would have been below the limit. We advanced a special reason why he should not be disqualified, on the basis that for the alcohol he had unwittingly consumed he would have been under the prosecution limit. The court decided that our client and his two witnesses were telling the truth and were satisfied that there was a special reason which enabled them not to disqualify him.
The MD of a company whose main role was selling, instructed us to represent him when he was summonsed for speeding and faced disqualification for six months as a "totter", having already accumulated nine penalty points. Our client had 4/5 appointments a day at the homes of prospective clients and drove 500 miles a week. He brought in 50% of the company's orders. Business was slow and there had been redunancies and pay cuts in the company. At the hearing, the court took the view that disqualification for as long as six months would result in redunancies and hardship to blameless staff, but not if the disqualification was for only three months and so a ban of that length was imposed. The shorter ban also wiped the slate clean of the existing nine points.