Driving under the influence - advice

skreepersskreepers Posts: 1,435
Forum Member
✭✭✭
You go through a drive thru McDonalds and the worker tells you to wait in the parking bay for your food. The kid actually calls the police because he thinks you may be driving under the influence. Then the police arrive and carry out a breathalyser test on you which you fail. This all takes place with the car turned off in McDonalds car park.

Please can someone tell me what the repercussions of this may be? Thank you
«13

Comments

  • Seth1Seth1 Posts: 676
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Drunk in charge. Ban + fine.

    Goodnight.
  • skreepersskreepers Posts: 1,435
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Is the ban guaranteed? And is it a minimum 12 months?
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If you are found guilty:

    Ban not guaranteed, but highly likely (12-36 months recommended). If you already have any points on your licence, you will basically be banned.

    Absolute minimum is 10 penalty points and a big fine if you aren't banned.

    3 month prison sentence (max) is theoretically possible, but unlikely.

    http://www.drinkdrivinglaw.co.uk/offences/in_charge_of_a_vehicle_with_excess_alcohol.htm
  • Rae_RooRae_Roo Posts: 1,185
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    If you are found guilty:

    Ban not guaranteed, but highly likely (12-36 months recommended). If you already have any points on your licence, you will basically be banned.

    Absolute minimum is 10 penalty points and a big fine if you aren't banned.

    3 month prison sentence (max) is theoretically possible, but unlikely.

    http://www.drinkdrivinglaw.co.uk/offences/in_charge_of_a_vehicle_with_excess_alcohol.htm

    Pretty much this!

    It's a slam dunk, regardless of whether the engines 'off' now... It's unlikely they got a gin and tonic at McDonald's. You can get fines, etc just sleeping drunk in your car seat...

    Good on the kid too, people who are idiotic enough to drink and drive, deserve all they get and a damn lot more imo.....
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Rae_Roo wrote: »
    Pretty much this!

    It's a slam dunk, regardless of whether the engines 'off' now... It's unlikely they got a gin and tonic at McDonald's. You can get fines, etc just sleeping drunk in your car seat...

    Good on the kid too, people who are idiotic enough to drink and drive, deserve all they get and a damn lot more imo.....

    Indeed.

    If the OP avoids a ban, they have done extremely well and are very lucky.

    The penalty for actual drunk driving (NB: different to 'drunk in charge)' is a mandatory ban.

    In theory, if the police have evidence (CCTV, eyewitness willing to testify), they could have arrested the OP for actual drunk driving, but I guess they were playing it safe to guarantee a conviction.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,279
    Forum Member
    I don't think there's any such offence as "driving under the influence". It's "being in charge of a motor vehicle under the influence". So you don't have to be driving.

    I could be wrong though, so I'm happy to be corrected.
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Rowdy wrote: »
    I don't think there's any such offence as "driving under the influence". It's "being in charge of a motor vehicle under the influence". So you don't have to be driving.

    I could be wrong though, so I'm happy to be corrected.

    Yeah, they're basically two completely separate offences.

    Being in charge is the lesser offence, drunk driving is more serious.


    You can be arrested, charged and found guilty of being drunk in charge even if you never put the key in the ignition and the vehicle never moved. If they were just asleep in the car the onus is on the defendant to prove they never had any intention of driving, not for the police to prove that they were going to drive.
  • gdjman68wasdigigdjman68wasdigi Posts: 21,705
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Deleted
  • RandomSallyRandomSally Posts: 7,072
    Forum Member
    Considering you obviously had to drive there to go to the drive through then you deserve everything you get.
  • michaelalanrmichaelalanr Posts: 862
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    Yeah, they're basically two completely separate offences.

    Being in charge is the lesser offence, drunk driving is more serious.


    You can be arrested, charged and found guilty of being drunk in charge even if you never put the key in the ignition and the vehicle never moved. If they were just asleep in the car the onus is on the defendant to prove they never had any intention of driving, not for the police to prove that they were going to drive.

    Drunk in charge also covers if you were over the drink drive limit while supervising a learner driver, and not physically driving.
  • Maria_RobinsonMaria_Robinson Posts: 3,004
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    skreepers wrote: »
    You go through a drive thru McDonalds and the worker tells you to wait in the parking bay for your food. The kid actually calls the police because he thinks you may be driving under the influence. Then the police arrive and carry out a breathalyser test on you which you fail. This all takes place with the car turned off in McDonalds car park.

    Please can someone tell me what the repercussions of this may be? Thank you

    Frankly you are a disgrace - driving a car under the influence of drink or drugs. You could kill or maim someone. Just because you wanted to stuff your face with burgers. I would send you down you skank.
  • Early BirdEarly Bird Posts: 2,147
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    only an idiot drives a car under the influence of alcohol or drugs.....

    your responses and reactions are subdued, why take the risk?


    as others have stated, people have died at the hands of a driver who drove whilst under the influence... :(
  • hurrikane313hurrikane313 Posts: 2,265
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What they should do is give you a life sentence, I know that sounds harsh but speaking as someone who has lost a loved one due to an idiot like you. Its better to have you off the roads.

    What they will do on the other hand is stand there shaking their fingers at you whilst tutting.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 8,916
    Forum Member
    skreepers wrote: »
    Please can someone tell me what the repercussions of this may be? Thank you

    You fail to notice that you ate the gherkin.
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What they should do is give you a life sentence, I know that sounds harsh but speaking as someone who has lost a loved one due to an idiot like you. Its better to have you off the roads.

    What they will do on the other hand is stand there shaking their fingers at you whilst tutting.

    The OP will most likely receive a ban and have to pay a fine in the region of £1,000-£2,500.
  • getzlsgetzls Posts: 4,007
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Considering you obviously had to drive there to go to the drive through then you deserve everything you get.

    The OP didn't actually say it was him driving.
  • tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    Well who ever this person is i hope they get the book thrown at them and given the max the law allows. There is no excuse for DD. I believe we should have zero drinking when in charge of a car
  • cris182cris182 Posts: 9,595
    Forum Member
    Well done to the person in Mcdonalds too, Some people wouldn't get involved and just ignore the issue but good on them.

    Worth being wrong and looking foolish when it is something like this, Lives are at stake
  • hurrikane313hurrikane313 Posts: 2,265
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    The OP will most likely receive a ban and have to pay a fine in the region of £1,000-£2,500.

    Thats my point, a ban wow. How many times have people been banned but still drove their cars? And wow a fine, thats really an appropriate punishment for these types of idiot putting lives at risk.
  • jojoenojojoeno Posts: 1,842
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Technically he has been caught in a privately owned carpark NOT on a public road..get a good lawyer who specialises in D&D statutes
  • gdjman68wasdigigdjman68wasdigi Posts: 21,705
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    This is probably a wind up just to annoy everyone
  • JJ75JJ75 Posts: 1,954
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Frankly you are a disgrace - driving a car under the influence of drink or drugs. You could kill or maim someone. Just because you wanted to stuff your face with burgers. I would send you down you skank.

    You could kill or maim someone anyway without being under the influence.
  • chrisjrchrisjr Posts: 33,282
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jojoeno wrote: »
    Technically he has been caught in a privately owned carpark NOT on a public road..get a good lawyer who specialises in D&D statutes
    May not be relevant. If the public have basically unrestricted access to the car park a lot of the road traffic law still applies.
    It is important to note that references to ‘road’ therefore generally include footpaths, bridleways and cycle tracks, and many roadways and driveways on private land (including many car parks). In most cases, the law will apply to them and there may be additional rules for particular paths or ways. Some serious driving offences, including drink-driving offences, also apply to all public places, for example public car parks.

    https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/the-road-user-and-the-law
  • tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    jojoeno wrote: »
    Technically he has been caught in a privately owned carpark NOT on a public road..get a good lawyer who specialises in D&D statutes

    And most Mcdonalds, have cctv so that would show the person driving in from a public highway and be time coded.
  • grumpyscotgrumpyscot Posts: 11,354
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jojoeno wrote: »
    Technically he has been caught in a privately owned carpark NOT on a public road..get a good lawyer who specialises in D&D statutes

    Won't wash. I got a driver banned for 3 years and fined £100 back in the 1970s even though he was in a pub car park at the time. he didn't start the car - he was too drunk, but was done for drunk in charge. The fact that the car park had no gates meant that the Road Traffic Act applied. (His lawyer argued the point that it was private and lost!)

    So expect a ban - and a huge - and I mean HUGE thump in your insurance (if not total refusal) for the next 10 years, as well as as potential ban on getting into the USA, Canada, Australia or New Zealand.

    (Note: IIRC a driving ban stays on your license for 10 years, so has to be revealed even under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act)
Sign In or Register to comment.