September 2014 - Forrest Williams Archive - Forrest Williams September 2014 - Forrest Williams

Freephone: 0800 1933 999
Mobile Freephone: 01623 397 200

Chat Online

Motoring Advice Blog

Archive for September, 2014

Drink Driving Solicitors at Lincoln Magistrates Court

Roberto Giovannini* was honest when he first approached us.  He told us he had been using the internet to search for drink driving solicitors who might be able to help with the summons he had received.  Like many of our first-time callers, he was ‘ringing around’.

 

We told him, as we do all enquirers, that we were happy to offer free initial advice with no obligation (or pressure) in terms of instructing us.  We actually encouraged him to call other companies, as a comparison, but advised him to take note of his ‘gut’ feeling when speaking about his forthcoming hearing at Lincoln Magistrates’ Court.

 

During our initial conversation, Roberto told us that he had been charged with drink driving (53mg in breath).  We advised him about likely sentencing by referring to the Magistrates’ Sentencing Guidelines, then discussed with him in detail what had actually happened on the date in question, so we could check if there might be any defence to the charge, or whether any of the 3 Special Reasons might apply.  (This is very important, as it could mean that a person avoids the automatic disqualification which is imposed as a result of being found guilty of a drink driving offence.)

 

Although none of the 3 Special Reasons appeared to apply in Roberto’s case, nor was there any obvious defence to the charge, he told us later that he was impressed by our thoroughness and by the time we spent discussing his case in detail.  In contrast, Roberto commented on other companies he has spoken to, who seemed motivated only by taking a payment from him, and pushing him towards a not guilty plea – and therefore higher fees.

 

Forrest Williams fully prepared Roberto’s case and he pleaded guilty to the drink driving charge, but with mitigating factors.  A long-term non-drinker, Roberto told us he had succumbed to having a few alcoholic drinks at a party, which was very out of character for him.  On further questioning, he told us that he had been suffering from depression of late, and that he had been acting out of character as a result.

 

Although Roberto’s reading of 53mg was not at the bottom of the lowest band, his barrister advanced mitigation relating to his good character, professional standing and recent illness and the minimum disqualification of 12 months was imposed by the court.  On completion of the drink drive rehabilitation course, Roberto’s disqualification period will be reduced by 3 months.

 

Given his guilty plea, this was the very best outcome for Roberto on the day.  He told us he was very pleased with the result and that he was glad he had appointed Forrest Williams as we gave him the impression from the very beginning that we really cared.  And we did.

 

*Client’s name changed to protect identity.

 

CALL US NOW ON 01623 397200
INITIAL ADVICE IS ALWAYS FREE

Client Found Not Guilty of Failure To Provide A Specimen

When Susan Downes* first approached us, she was distraught.  Her first telephone conversation with a paralegal at Forrest Williams was long and halting, as she told her story between periods of silence and sobbing.

 

This experience is not unusual, however, and all staff at Forrest Williams are prepared to wait patiently and gently encourage the person at the other end of the telephone to tell their story, in their own time.  We understand that when a person is charged with an offence this is a deeply worrying and stressful time, and we are keen to offer support as well as free initial advice.

 

Susan told us that she had been charged with failure to provide a specimen of breath for analysis, after police had pulled her over as a result of them having noticed that one of her rear lights was not functioning.  She had been notified of a hearing at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court in just two weeks’ time.

 

Although Susan admitted to us that she had consumed some alcohol that night, whilst out with friends, she was most upset by the fact that the police officers who arrested her were of the opinion that she had wilfully refused to give a breath sample.

 

Susan told us that she had tried several times to give a sample, but that she had struggled.  We asked her about this.  Susan explained that she had had a chest infection for several weeks, and that she had consulted her GP about this.

 

On the basis of her medical issues, we advised her to plead not guilty.

 

In due course, a copy of her medical records was requested from the GP’s surgery, as well as a copy of the prosecution paperwork and the CCTV of the breath test room in the police station.

 

Susan was represented at her trial by a specialist motoring law barrister and was found to be not guilty.  She was very relieved about the court’s decision and gave thanks to Forrest Williams for supporting her through this long and difficult process, which took five months from the date of arrest to the trial.

 

Unfortunately, Susan is not alone.  Forrest Williams are approached by many people who have been charged with failing to provide a specimen of breath where there are clearly medical reasons for them not having been able to give a sustained breath, as required for the evidential breath test machine in station.  In addition, some people are too stressed and anxious to comply with this lawful requirement, which can also constitute a defence.  If you think this could apply to you, please call us as soon as possible on 01623 600645 to discuss.

For more details of how we can help go to our Failing to Provide a Specimen page.

*Client’s name changed to protect identity.

 

CALL US NOW ON 01623 397200
INITIAL ADVICE IS ALWAYS FREE

Driving Without Due Care and Attention Charge Discontinued

Cindy Morrison* approached Forrest Williams after she had been charged with driving without due care and attention following an incident in which her vehicle hit another car whilst she was reversing in a hospital car park.  Cindy explained to us at the time that she had been visiting a seriously ill relative, and that the weather had been horrendous, with torrential rain.  Although she had felt a slight ‘tap’, she had inspected both vehicles and could see no damage to either, so had continued on her way.

 

However, the incident had been witnessed by a hospital worker, who had made a note of Cindy’s registration plate and notified the police.

 

Cindy was duly approached by the police, interviewed and charged.

 

As she already had 9 points on her licence, she received a summons to court as the ‘totting up’ of points to (or beyond) the threshold of 12 points meant that she would automatically fall to be disqualified from driving for a period of 6 months.  As Cindy relied on her driving licence to be able to work as a Sales Executive, she had asked us for help in preparing an Exceptional Hardship application as she knew that this was the only way in which she might avoid the court’s automatic disqualification for ‘totting’.

 

However, on the day of the hearing, Cindy’s barrister read through the paperwork provided by the Crown Prosecution Service and spoke with the prosecutor about the charge of driving without due care and attention.  He cited case law and queried whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution, given the circumstances relating to the offence.

 

In an unusual move, the prosecutor reviewed Cindy’s file while in court and made the decision to discontinue the charge against her.

 

Cindy was delighted with this result.  Not only did this mean that she would avoid the automatic 6 month disqualification as a result of ‘totting’, but it also meant that she would be refunded a percentage of her legal fees.

 

Cindy gave thanks to Forrest Williams, with a special mention to the barrister who represented her at the hearing in Mansfield Magistrates’ Court.  Forrest Williams were proud to be able to inform Cindy that every barrister instructed by the company is hand-selected.  Not only do these professionals have to demonstrate excellent advocacy skills and legal knowledge, but also a dedication to client care that is second to none.

 

If you want further information on Careless Driving/Driving without due care got to our specialist Careless Driving page.

 

*Client’s name changed to protect identity.

 

CALL US NOW ON 01623 397200
INITIAL ADVICE IS ALWAYS FREE

Forrest Williams TV