Ramifications of failure to supply breath specimen

[aka_kerrly]

Greendubber said:

So when you were asked if there are any medical reasons as to why you could not provide a sample what do you say?

Don't forget it's all very likely to be on CCTV, from when you walk into the custody suite until the moment you leave.

In the case of the chap I know it appears that the more of a dick you act the more likely you will be bunged into a cell and left! He failed to provide a blood test because he claimed to be scared of needles, said he couldn't urinate whilst people were watching and kept whistling through the breath test device.

Thus he was chucked in a cell where he pissed himself!

This is not a joke!!!!!!!

[Meoricin]

RSoovy4 said:

Betsy said:

I was unable to get my breath as was having panic attack.............

Well, wouldn't you panic a bit if you were caught drink driving?

[340600]

As already mentioned the penalty for failure to provide is often more severe than a simple drink drive, you will be disqualified for 12 months or more. You'll also be categorised as a high risk offender meaning you'll need to pass a medical exam before you can get your licence back from the DVLA.

ETA:

betsy13 said:

Also the car reg they have put on the documentation they have given me is incorrect, twice. Am I able to argue that I was not in the car they claim I was as they have the reg listed wrongly?

No. May I also remind you that perverting the course of justice carries a custodial sentence (prison).

Edited by 340600 on Monday 28th January 17:51

[CYMR0]

aka_kerrly said:

CYMR0 said:

Failing to provide is a specific offence that is punished more severely than being less than massively over the limit.

Not always, someone I know refused to provide a breath, a urine or blood sample and received a 12month ban when had they provided (by their own admission) they would have been banned far longer.

OP: after receiving hospital treatment was no blood sample taken?

Otherwise this is going to be a very odd case.

I think we're agreeing here. 12 months is pretty 'good' going (if you see what I mean)for drink driving... had they blown slightly over, perhaps up to double the limit, they'd have had the 12-month ban. If they'd been way over, they'd have had more of a ban than they actually got.

340600 said:

betsy13 said:

Also the car reg they have put on the documentation they have given me is incorrect, twice. Am I able to argue that I was not in the car they claim I was as they have the reg listed wrongly?

No. May I also remind you that perverting the course of justice carries a custodial sentence (prison).

Agreed, although putting forward an unsupported and unsuccessful factual defence is not necessarily perverting. In any event, the OP's question was: "If I am charged with failing to provide a breath sample in respect of vehicle A1ABC, whereas I was driving AA51ABC, do I have a defence?" (to which the answer is still no, because the prosecutor will simply amend the charge sheet at the Court's discretion and the OP fails to get any discount for pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity).

[XCP]

aka_kerrly said:

In the case of the chap I know it appears that the more of a dick you act the more likely you will be bunged into a cell and left! He failed to provide a blood test because he claimed to be scared of needles, said he couldn't urinate whilst people were watching and kept whistling through the breath test device.

Thus he was chucked in a cell where he pissed himself!

This is not a joke!!!!!!!

Sounds reasonable. Presumably he was detained for some time under S.10 as well, if he was Mr. Unhelpful?

[Red 4]

betsy13 said:

Can anyone give me an idea as to the possible ramifications of failing to provide a breath specimen? Are the police able to do me for drink driving if they are unable to prove I was over the limit?

Depends - power of arrest only exists if a constable has reasonable grounds to suspect a person has alcohol in his body.

If a specimen of breath is requested at the roadside (lawfully; moving traffic offence, etc) and there is no suspicion of alcohol then it's report only. (Still an offence albeit with a lesser punishment).

As you were arrested I suspect the former; expect a disqualification unless you can prove reasonable excuse for failing to provide.

[skinley]

Minimum 18 month ban, you would have been better of blowing in the tube instead of having a 'panic attack'.

[Grenoble]

skinley said:

Minimum 18 month ban, you would have been better of blowing in the tube instead of having a 'panic attack'.

Where do you get 18 months from?

[Aretnap]

Grenoble said:

Where do you get 18 months from?

Not mandatory, but for a deliberate failure the sentencing guidelines do recommend a ban of at least 17 months. 12-16 months is appropriate for "defendant refused test when had honestly held but unreasonable excuse". See here page 128.

[Roo]

Fortunately I've never suffered from panic attacks so am unsure of the ramifications.

But are you saying that the pressure of an innocent driver being stopped was so bad that the panic attack it induced resulted in hospitalization purely through being asked to give a breath test?

I hope to god you never drive anywhere in the south east in that case. You'd have a coronary.

[Pontoneer]

aka_kerrly said:

Not always, someone I know refused to provide a breath, a urine or blood sample and received a 12month ban when had they provided (by their own admission) they would have been banned far longer.

OP: after receiving hospital treatment was no blood sample taken?

Otherwise this is going to be a very odd case.

Just curious on this point .

If someone either following an RTC , or arrested on suspicion of DD , is taken to hospital , isn't there something to do with doctor-patient confidentiality which prevents blood evidence being admissable under some circumstances ?

[AMST09]

Pontoneer said:

Just curious on this point .

If someone either following an RTC , or arrested on suspicion of DD , is taken to hospital , isn't there something to do with doctor-patient confidentiality which prevents blood evidence being admissable under some circumstances ?

Got a friend thats a paramedic, apparently the police ask them for blood samples of the people who are unconsicious who are thought to be drink driving all the time

[singlecoil]

Roo said:

Fortunately I've never suffered from panic attacks so am unsure of the ramifications.

But are you saying that the pressure of an innocent driver being stopped was so bad that the panic attack it induced resulted in hospitalization purely through being asked to give a breath test?

I hope to god you never drive anywhere in the south east in that case. You'd have a coronary.

Those were the lines I was thinking along.

[JulianHJ]

What were the circs of the panic attack? Were you pulled over for a particular reason or was this following an RTC? Did you provide a roadside sample? Were you offered the option to provide blood or urine? Were you interviewed or questioned under caution at any point? Was the roadside stuff on video, i.e. traffic officers with Provida or officers with body worn video?

[Mister3man]

OP on the day you were stopped, had you had anything to drink before you drove?

[monthefish]

JulianHJ said:

Were you offered the option to provide blood or urine?

[singlecoil]

JulianHJ said:

Were you offered the option to provide blood or urine?

I expect if it was a serious panic attack then he probably did provide the latter, though the PC would have had to wring it out of his trousers.

[T0nup]

Berk.

[betsy13]

Understand the sarcastic comments but for a bit of background. I've been taken into hospital twice in the last 2 weeks with crazy high blood pressure. This has resulted in my having anxiety attacks along with the symptoms as I feel so terrible I think I'm going to peg it. In addition to this I've had paramedics out to the house who have been able to stabilise me at home. I suffered from similar symptoms about a year ago and collapsed injuring my head quite badly. My GP is yet to get to the bottom of the problem despite test after test, I am as we speak sitting here with a 24 hr blood pressure monitor on. None of this was related to alcohol consumption.

What my query is/ was, is that as I have been charged with a stand alone offence of failure to provide am I able to contest that on the grounds of the above, all of which can be corroborated by my GP, hospital and paramedics. I was not asked to give a blood or urine sample at any point and was not given the option of providing either as an alternative.

Anyway, I'm waiting for AGT to come back to me and I'll see what the advice is

[RSoovy4]

betsy13 said:

Understand the sarcastic comments but for a bit of background. I've been taken into hospital twice in the last 2 weeks with crazy high blood pressure. This has resulted in my having anxiety attacks along with the symptoms as I feel so terrible I think I'm going to peg it. In addition to this I've had paramedics out to the house who have been able to stabilise me at home. I suffered from similar symptoms about a year ago and collapsed injuring my head quite badly. My GP is yet to get to the bottom of the problem despite test after test, I am as we speak sitting here with a 24 hr blood pressure monitor on. None of this was related to alcohol consumption.

What my query is/ was, is that as I have been charged with a stand alone offence of failure to provide am I able to contest that on the grounds of the above, all of which can be corroborated by my GP, hospital and paramedics. I was not asked to give a blood or urine sample at any point and was not given the option of providing either as an alternative.

Anyway, I'm waiting for AGT to come back to me and I'll see what the advice is

Had you been drinking alcohol or not?