Are you about to lose your driving licence?

Make sure you have an expert legal traffic specialist to represent you.

Always have expert legal representation if you are going to Court for motoring offences and could lose your licence

Andy Cave, Partner & Solicitor in our Motoring offences team represents many people summonsed to court for traffic offences. Each case over the years has highlighted the importance of having expert legal representation so as to make sure you get the best outcome for you, your company and your family. Here are two recent case studies where our expert legal defence helped two company directors retain their driving licence.

Case Study One

Background

A local company director appeared in court for driving without due care. The defendant found he was stationary in a queue of traffic; he then commenced a U-turn so as to proceed on his journey in an alternative direction. When commencing the U-turn he unfortunately caused an accident.

Defence

The case was presented to the court on the basis that the defendent did not drive without due care or below the standard expected of a reasonably competent driver and because of this the defendent should not have been disqualified.

Outcome

After hearing all the evidence the magistrates concluded that the driver was responsible for the action and therefore guilty. The magistrate did however recognise from the way the case was defended that the degree of negligence was not so high that the driver deserved to be disqualified. The magistrate passed a sentence giving the defendant three penalty points and a fine.

Legal Traffic specialist Andy Cave advises:

“In some cases it is essential to have a trial of fact in order to present a case the best way which can often mitigate a case so as to ensure that the defendant albeit guilty receive the appropriate and in this case minimum penalty. If you find yourself in a position where you are facing a police or court enquiry into a traffic offence you are always best advised to seek professional advice from a traffic law expert.”

Case Study Two

Background

A company director appeared in Ipswich Court having totted up 12 points on his licence for speeding offences and faced disqualification from driving for a period of six months. This would have been detrimental to the business as well as significantly affecting his home life.

Defence

The defendant appeared in the witness box for one hour to answer the questions posed by the Court on why he should be allowed to continue to drive. The defence represented that he had managed to show that he had an exceptional hardship argument and should be allowed to continue to drive.

Outcome

After significant deliberation by the magistrates they considered that the threshold of exceptional hardship had been met and he will be allowed to continue to drive.

Andy Cave representing, stated after the case:

“This was a difficult case and the success was down to the preparation. The full ramifications of losing his license were considered and evidence had been prepared by way of written submission to be presented to the court to support his case. It is only when a person faces losing their license that they realise the significance of having it.”

If you find yourself with a summons to attend Court for a motoring offence it is always best to seek representation and advice from a specialist traffic Lawyer, in order to give you the best chance of retaining your license.

Hunt and Coombs offers specialist traffic law advice and representation on a fixed fee basis so that you can help yourself to secure the best possible outcome for you, your business and your family.

For further help and advice on motoring offences or to discuss your case in more detail please contact our Crime department on 01733 882800 or email info@hcsolicitors.co.uk .

Author

Andy Cave, Partner & Solicitor

andy.cave@hcsolicitors.co.uk

Go back

Share

Subscribe to our RSS feed to receive all of our news updates.

This article has been prepared for general interest and information purposes only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. While all possible care has been taken in the preparation of this article, no responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by the firm or the authors.