Scottish Drink Drving Chages
Discussion
Out of curiosity has anyone got an idea of what the penalty will be for those over the new Scottish level of 50mgs versus the rUK limit of 80mgs come December 5th?
It would seem churlish for someone to be banned in rUK for something that is not illegal in any shape or form.
Also, if I recalll correctly, in Germany low level fails are usually just a fine/points rather than an immediate ban? Is it likely the same will apply North of the border?
It would seem churlish for someone to be banned in rUK for something that is not illegal in any shape or form.
Also, if I recalll correctly, in Germany low level fails are usually just a fine/points rather than an immediate ban? Is it likely the same will apply North of the border?
Interestingly the limit is changing in NZ on 1st December, down to 50 from 80 as well.
However between 50 and 80 the penalty is the equivalent of 100 pound fine and 6 points, a lot more sensible.
Over 80 is a three or six month ban - but some of the penalties lack real bite as insurance isn't compulsory.
Couple of drink driving convictions? Buy a cheap car and forget the insurance.
(Rarely bother with it myself. But note, all personal injury stuff is NOT part of insurance in NZ, hence it is usually quite cheap).
However between 50 and 80 the penalty is the equivalent of 100 pound fine and 6 points, a lot more sensible.
Over 80 is a three or six month ban - but some of the penalties lack real bite as insurance isn't compulsory.
Couple of drink driving convictions? Buy a cheap car and forget the insurance.
(Rarely bother with it myself. But note, all personal injury stuff is NOT part of insurance in NZ, hence it is usually quite cheap).
hidetheelephants said:
Welcome to the facist regime of mein fuhrer Macaskill; he's a dick and this is yet more illiberal b
ks, this time criminalising people while making no-one any safer. I could accept the lowered limit if it involved a fine and/or points, but this is a total turd of a law change.
My thoughts exactly.ks, this time criminalising people while making no-one any safer. I could accept the lowered limit if it involved a fine and/or points, but this is a total turd of a law change.ellroy said:
Out of curiosity has anyone got an idea of what the penalty will be for those over the new Scottish level of 50mgs versus the rUK limit of 80mgs come December 5th?
It would seem churlish for someone to be banned in rUK for something that is not illegal in any shape or form.
Also, if I recalll correctly, in Germany low level fails are usually just a fine/points rather than an immediate ban? Is it likely the same will apply North of the border?
The Scottish parliament doesn't have the power to reduce the penalty - only the limit.It would seem churlish for someone to be banned in rUK for something that is not illegal in any shape or form.
Also, if I recalll correctly, in Germany low level fails are usually just a fine/points rather than an immediate ban? Is it likely the same will apply North of the border?
Other countries in Europe have lower limits than England but lower penalties.
There's a parliamentary briefing note about the aforementioned. May post it later.
In short, no one knows. I haven't seen anything in the media that says any ban will apply Scotland only or UK-wide.
Looks like some some of drink driving West Lothian question. I did have a colleague who was a Jersey native and he had a life driving ban for causing death by dangerous driving (he crashed while drunk and killed his passenger) but the ban was only for Jersey.
Agree with OP that many continental countries have a lower DD threshold but also have lower grade punishments for the minor offences.
Looks like some some of drink driving West Lothian question. I did have a colleague who was a Jersey native and he had a life driving ban for causing death by dangerous driving (he crashed while drunk and killed his passenger) but the ban was only for Jersey.
Agree with OP that many continental countries have a lower DD threshold but also have lower grade punishments for the minor offences.
agtlaw said:
I feel deep joy when I read of cosy committees like this; the three people giving evidence to the committee are a dibble, an anti-boozing campaigner and a anti-driving campaigner.Mr Taxpayer said:
In short, no one knows. I haven't seen anything in the media that says any ban will apply Scotland only or UK-wide.
Banned means banned. Any ban would be UK-wide. Not really any different to how things would work if the Scottish parliament were to lower the speed limits on Scottish roads - the endorsement would go on your GB licence and the points would be taken into account for totting purposes through out Great Britain.Mr Taxpayer said:
I did have a colleague who was a Jersey native and he had a life driving ban for causing death by dangerous driving (he crashed while drunk and killed his passenger) but the ban was only for Jersey.
Jersey is a different jurisdiction, unlike Scotland which is the same jurisdiction but just has some different rules. In the past a ban in Jersey did not mean a ban in the UK (or vice versa) but now ( since 2003, I think) there is mutual recognition of driving bans between GB, NI, the Channel Islands and Gibraltar, so if your colleague did the same today he'd be banned in the UK as well. (He might well be in fact - I'm not sure if the mutual recognition applies retrospectively).Aretnap said:
Jersey is a different jurisdiction...
Whilst we do have mutual recognition of driving disqualifications with the Channel Islands, Eire, IoM, etc, it doesn't apply to all types of disqualification - and when I last checked (a while ago) ,from memory, a UK 'totting up ban' wasn't recognised in Eire! agtlaw said:
Whilst we do have mutual recognition of driving disqualifications with the Channel Islands, Eire, IoM, etc, it doesn't apply to all types of disqualification
Doesn't it? As far as the Channel Islands, NI, IoM and Gibraltar go relevant legislation seems to apply to any disqualification - it doesn't specify particular offences or types of disqualification. Which types of disqualification aren't covered by it?agtlaw said:
and when I last checked (a while ago) ,from memory, a UK 'totting up ban' wasn't recognised in Eire!
Indeed - AIUI mutual recognition with Ireland works slightly differently than it does with "the colonies" and only applies to certain offences, and not to totting bans ( link).My main point though was that unlike the Channel Islands, NI, Eire etc, Scotland and England have a single body that issues driving licences, a single system of endorsement, and a single body of legislation which sets down the main principles of motoring law (even if some of the fine detail is different) so the need for mutual recognition doesn't arise - a ban imposed by any GB court automatically applies throughout GB.
That isn't the "relevant legislation" as it omits Eire. Also, the section you've quoted applies to UK recognition of an 'outside' disqualification. Mutual is two way. You'd need to find the foreign legislation too.
I was specifically thinking of the GB totting up ban not applying to Eire - which i looked at ages ago. I haven't had to research Eire disqualifications and their application to England.
I'd exercise caution with the CPS pages. I was looking at a couple this week that needed a thorough re-write - recent relevant cases not mentioned. I get the impression that the pages were written several years ago and are not updated.
I was specifically thinking of the GB totting up ban not applying to Eire - which i looked at ages ago. I haven't had to research Eire disqualifications and their application to England.
I'd exercise caution with the CPS pages. I was looking at a couple this week that needed a thorough re-write - recent relevant cases not mentioned. I get the impression that the pages were written several years ago and are not updated.
agtlaw said:
That isn't the "relevant legislation" as it omits Eire. Also, the section you've quoted applies to UK recognition of an 'outside' disqualification. Mutual is two way. You'd need to find the foreign legislation too.
Well, pedantically it's not ALL the relevant legislation, but the point was originally prompted by the question of whether a Jersey ban applies in the UK , so it seems to be the relevant legislation as far as that question goes. (Or also pedantically, as far as the application of a Jersey ban in GB goes. There's presumably similar legislation dealing with Jersey bans in Northern Ireland).I deliberately didn't mention Eire in my earlier post as I know that mutual recognition with them works differently, and isn't as comprehensive as it is with the other places.
agtlaw said:
I'd exercise caution with the CPS pages. I was looking at a couple this week that needed a thorough re-write - recent relevant cases not mentioned. I get the impression that the pages were written several years ago and are not updated.
Thanks - noted.So 51mg in Gretna means a UK 12 month ban, while 51mg, a few miles south in Carlisle means "Try and stay off the booze, but be on your way, sir" in Carlisle. I accept the point about totting up points being UK-wide, perhaps a better penalty would be a sliding scale of points from 50-79mg? Say 50-59mg 6 points rising to 11 points for 75-79mg; 12 is and always will be a bus-ticket. You'll have to declare the points to your insurer and they'll be guranteed to hammer your wallet, but at least you'll keep mobile.
I detest drink driving, and I'm not in principle against lowering the limit, but it does seem ridiculous to have different limits in Scotland and the rest of the UK.
I'm not convinced this will make more than a tiny difference to road safety. How many people injure others being between 50 and 80?
It might make people decide to not even have a single drink if they are driving, which is probably a good thing, but on the other hand it might make people think "fk it, I'm going to be over the limit anyway, I might as well have 5 pints". Who knows? It doesn't seem particularly evidence-led.
I'm not convinced this will make more than a tiny difference to road safety. How many people injure others being between 50 and 80?
It might make people decide to not even have a single drink if they are driving, which is probably a good thing, but on the other hand it might make people think "f
k it, I'm going to be over the limit anyway, I might as well have 5 pints". Who knows? It doesn't seem particularly evidence-led.rewc said:
v12Legs said:
I'm not convinced this will make more than a tiny difference to road safety. How many people injure others being between 50 and 80?
They really have no idea. In fact they have no idea between 01 & 80. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff