Motoring Offences Case Studies

Our motoring solicitors have an excellent track record at getting successful outcomes. See some of our case studies below.

Drink Driving Special Reasons

Client D Client D was a nurse charged with drink driving.  D had been drinking at home. D was asked by her neighbour to move her car as it was partially obstructing the driveway.  Client D drove her vehicle a distance of two yards but collided into the rear of another parked vehicle.  D member of the public called the police who duly attended.  Client D was taken to a local police station and breathlysed. She was found to over the limit.  She was later charged with drink driving.

D was represented by Patrick O’Hanlon at Court, D pleaded guilty to drink driving but raised Special Reasons on the grounds of distance driven. A special reasons hearing was requested. At the special reasons hearing the Bench accepted the argument and D was not disqualified.
 

Drink Driving

Client A. Client A was arrested on suspicion of drink driving and conveyed to the custody suite at a nearby police station. After being released under investigation A contacted Patrick O’Hanlon of BSQ.  Upon speaking to BSQ, A confirmed that the police asked for a sample of urine rather than a breath reading as there had been an issue with the breath intoxyliser machine at the station.  When A described the procedure in respect of the urine sample, it became apparent that the police officer who had conducted the procedure had not done so correctly and mishandled the urine sample. BSQ made several requests were made for CCTV footage from the custody suite of the sample process which was not provided.  Written representations were submitted on behalf of the client to the authorities buy BSQ. Eventually a decision was taken by the police to take no further action against A.

Client B. Client B was charged with drink driving and appeared at a local Magistrates Court.  B was arrested at his home address after a member of the public called police after seeing B leave a pub car park in his vehicle believing that he had been drinking earlier. When B was breathalysed in the police station, he was found to be over the drink drive limit. B told the arresting officer that he had not drunk any alcohol in the pub and but had consumed three bottles of Budweiser at his address after arriving home from the pub.

Patrick O’Hanlon of BSQ represented B at trial. B pleaded Not Guilty to drink driving and raised the defence post driving consumption.  An expert report was obtained with a “back calculation” of his alcohol reading in breath. This showed his breath reading at the station was consistent with the account he relied on. In addition, BSQ obtained the Body Worn Video Footage (BWV)  obtained from the arresting officer which showed the client advising the officer of his explanation in the police station. B was found Not Guilty at trial after the court viewed the BWV, heard live evidence from B and reviewed our expert’s report.

Client C. Client C was charged with drink driving. C was represented by Roger Sahota. C pleaded not guilty and his case was listed for trial at the Magistrates Court. During the trial submissions were made to the Court by the defence that the charge sheet against C contained a typographical error and the registration number identifying his vehicle was incorrect.  The Prosecution failed to apply to amend the charges against C to correct the error. At the end of the case the defence made a submission of no case to answer as the vehicle driven by C had not been correctly identified. The submission was upheld and the charges against C dismissed.

If you need legal representation, please call our offices on our 24 hour helpline on 0203 858 0853.