Charged Failing to Provide – Keep this in mind!

 If you have been charged with failing to provide a specimen of breath, blood or urine then you must act QUICKLY. The police will have arranged the earliest possible court date: TIME IS NOT ON YOUR SIDE! However, free immediate telephone advice is at hand but you need to make that first call NOW to the above number – for a few minutes free initial advice! YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BY MAKING THAT CALL! Remember; being convicted, or pleading guilty to, failing to provide a breath, blood or urine sample will have major repercussions for you, your family, work or business. How will you survive a driving ban of at least 12 months and probably more; this is the penalty if found guilty! The result could be even worse. What if the prosecution prove that you were hopelessly drunk, heavily under the influence of drugs, or some other aggravating feature of the case against you; then you could be facing up to 6 months jail time! There are other consequences:

  1. Being labelled a “High Risk Offender” – with all the shame that such a label carries;
  2. Having to undergo a DVLA medical examination and complete a detailed questionnaire, before (possibly) getting your licence back;
  3. Facing visa restrictions from some foreign countries;
  4. Having to attend an intensive “Drink Drive Rehabilitation Course” &
  5. Being hit with far higher car insurance premiums if the DVLA gives you your licence back.

  You may think that you have no choice but to plead guilty; you had been drinking, drove your vehicle and were stopped by the police. You failed the roadside breath or saliva test (or refused to provide), and then failed to provide a breath, blood or urine sample at the police station. How can you possibly fight such a charge?   But think again: even in the most seemingly hopeless failing to provide case [see references], it would be wrong to approach the problem that way, because you are “putting the cart before the horse” and reversing the burden of proof (which remains on the prosecution throughout). You don’t have to prove a thing: it is the prosecution who bring the case – they must prove it. It is they who must satisfy the court beyond reasonable doubt: nothing else will do. As was written by a leading drink and drug driving academic [Pauline M. Callow – “Drink Drive Case Notes”, Second Edn.]  

“The conviction rate is high, yet it is estimated that a considerable proportion of cases feature undetected procedural errors, which might have led to acquittal.”

  That view is supported by comments from a former Senior Crown Prosecutor:  

“I prosecuted for 20 years and never ceased to be astonished at how, on a daily basis, intelligent professional people would come to court, and (after a glance at the prosecution papers), plead guilty without having given a thought to consulting a lawyer.   The court clerk and I frequently advised them to speak to the duty solicitor, but we may as well have been speaking to a brick wall! Because the defendant had taken drink or drugs, driven and been stopped, then that was enough for them; thinking that the case couldn’t be challenged. My job was to review the file (given to me shortly before the hearing) and, if everything was apparently in order, prosecute it. I didn’t have access to all the paperwork and couldn’t say whether there might have been some unbeatable “loophole” defence. Anyway, that was a job for a defence lawyer: if the defendant chose not to instruct a solicitor, then that was a matter for he or she, not me!”