Drinking alcohol in your motorhome

[John H]

But the point is that no he doesn't have to make an initial judgement about intent. He absolutely doesn't.

And again it is for the driver to prove he had no intention of driving.

The law is not broader, please show me where a police officer has to make a judgement re intent

Section 5 Road Traffic Act

Driving or being in charge of a motor vehicle with alcohol concentration above prescribed limit.

(1)If a person—
(a)drives or attempts to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, or
(b)is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place,after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit he is guilty of an offence.
(2)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b) above to prove that at the time he is alleged to have committed the offence the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine remained likely to exceed the prescribed limit.
(3)The court may, in determining whether there was such a likelihood as is mentioned in subsection (2) above, disregard any injury to him and any damage to the vehicle.

The key phrase is the one I have highlighted. If the police officer assesses that you might attempt to drive then you can be arrested.

Just think about it logically - if it a defence to say that you did not intend to drive (and it is) then that means that, in deciding whether or not to arrest you, the police officer MUST ask himself whether or not he assesses that you intend to drive. It is not rocket science; it is common sense(although the longer I live, thelessof that I see in some people!). As it says in the excellent linkprovidedby Polar Bear above, the definition of being "in charge" can be far broader than most people think and the only definite way of avoiding prosecution is to not drink at all.

 

[John H]

My point was not about accidentally knocking off the handbrake but that the officer may decide that you were so far out of it that you could might let the handbrake off because you weren't in control of yourself. As for young children and dogs - YES, you are responsible if you leave them in the car and they do something that might cause an accident. I am beginning to think I don't want to be anywhere near you if you can't see a problem with driving while drunk or are willing to leave a young child unattended in a car!

 

[Val54]

The key phrase is the one I have highlighted. If the police officer assesses that you might attempt to drive then you can be arrested.

Just think about it logically - if it a defence to say that you did not intend to drive (and it is) then that means that, in deciding whether or not to arrest you, the police officer MUST ask himself whether or not he assesses that you intend to drive. It is not rocket science; it is common sense(although the longer I live, thelessof that I see in some people!). As it says in the excellent linkprovidedby Polar Bear above, the definition of being "in charge" can be far broader than most people think and the only definite way of avoiding prosecution is to not drink at all.

Sorry, you are not following the necessary and logical flow of events, the police officer cannot arrest you under these provisions unless you have failed a breathalyser test.
Dave

 

[John H]

Sorry, you are not following the necessary and logical flow of events, the police officer cannot arrest you under these provisions unless you have failed a breathalyser test.
Dave

Since the question was about whether or not you can be considered "in charge" of a vehicle while over the limit, I thought it was taken as read that you will have failed the breathalyser test. If you arenot over the limityou cannot be arrested for being drumk in charge under any circumstances. Thought that could be taken as read - but it seems I was wrong!

 

[Polar Bear]

The only way to win is 'not to play'!
Or keep the curtains closed, keep quite and don't answer the door until next morning?

 

[Tbear]

Definition of a Motor Vehicle.

The term 'motor vehicle' is defined in section 185(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and section 136(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as "a mechanically propelled vehicle, intended or adapted for use on roads".

Richard

 

[Tbear]

Why has this become complicated, If you are over the limit and look like you are going to drive your motorhome. You get caught and you loose your licence. Make it clear to any numpty that you have no intention of driving and what's then chances getting done. Literally unheard of.

Richard

 

[mossypossy]

Got me thinking

Has any motorhome ever been converted into a mini pub with a drinks license?

I have the carpet for it already:king:

 

[bubwal]

Got me thinking

Has any motorhome ever been converted into a mini pub with a drinks license?

I have the carpet for it already:king:

I don't have the licence but my MH is certainly a mini pub. Can't guarantee I'll have your favourite tipple so bring your own just in case (no corkage charge) and:banana: You're more than welcome to take a seat and use the facilities. I'll even throw in some salty snacks.

 

[Polar Bear]

He He! You can be a very naughty boy sometimes?

 

[mossypossy]

At last a use for that huge space under my bed

 

[trevskoda]

well david fare point but a veh with no conection to the driving wheels from engine would surfice but i dont think many folk will remove ther drive shafts just for a drink.

 

[trevskoda]

In charge of a vehicle with excess alcohol or while unfit

Drunk in charge of a motor vehicle

Just what i have been saying all along polar.

 

[Polar Bear]

I once came home from work at nine pm to find a neighbour from across the road had parked outside my gate preventing me getting in. Not wanting to start anything at that time of night I parked in the only space left at that time which was across the road almost but not quite blocking my neighbour drive. At ten pm after I had had three glasses of wine with my dinner I got a knock on the door. I opened it to find a policeman and policewoman standing there. They asked me very politely to move my vehicle because it was blocking my neighbours gate. I said I have had too much to drink and could not drive and that I was struggling to park my car because the guy complaining had blocked me out. I was told that if I did not move my car they would charge me with an offence. I asked about his car they said they would get him to move his on to his own drive when I had moved mine. I asked for them to give me written permission to drive under the influence! they refused but insisted I moved the car. I, fumingly went outside and got in the car and moved it down the road and walked back to find the police charging my neighbour with obstructing a private drive. Made me smile in the end.

 

[trevskoda]

A preliminary roadside breath test may be required by a constable in uniform who has reasonable cause to suspect a person driving or in charge of a vehicle on a road or other public place has alcohol in his or her body or has committed a traffic offence.

If the driver fails to submit to a test or the test shows the driver has a breath alcohol level above 35 mg, the police may arrest him or her. To actually prove that the driver has committed a drink driving offence, however, the police will take him or her back to the police station and carry out additional testing. (NB. This is because the police use hand-held breathalysers for roadside stops, which sometimes provide inaccurate results. Since these results cannot be relied on, they are not admissible as evidence in court proceedings.)

Note the wording, for example, Plainclothes DC's and undercover cops NOT in uniform can't do it. When they have done, which they should know they shouldn't, its been kicked out of court. If the roadside test is positive the Officer (should) say I am arresting you on "suspicion" of ... and read you your rights "You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned..." If in doubt you WILL be arrested, the Officer will NOT make the initial Judgement about intent. That's for the courts to decide. HE/She applies the law, it's the 12 good folks and Judge to decide and interpret intent. Hence our/your assertion it's a M/H (keys in drawer) living area etc may take months of (expensive) arguments and grief and worry and hassle to prove in Court. The copper unless he/she is called, will have forgotten about you a long time ago.


& Below, note the word "defendant" - You're in court by now trying desperately to prove you weren't in charge. Again the officer only had to apply reasonable suspicion, at the time, and would never ever, where lives are potentially at stake, (in my experience) err on the side of "on yur way sunny with a clip round the ear". Consider if smooth talking Joe Smith talked his way out of being in charge at the time and officer used his/her judgement and Joe killed others, the Cop would be metaphorically hung and would never put him/herself in that position.

What is the legal definition of being in charge?

There is no legal definition for the term "in charge" so each case will depend on its exact circumstances and facts. Generally, a Defendant is "in charge" if he was the owner/in possession of the vehicle or had recently driven it. He is not in charge if it is being driven by another person or is "a great distance" from the vehicle.

Matters are more complicated where a person is sitting in the vehicle or "otherwise involved with it". In charge can include attempting to gain entry to the vehicle and failing, having keys to the vehicle, having intention to take control of the vehicle or even "being near the vehicle".


What if I was in my car on my driveway having a cigarette trying to keep warm and I had no intention of driving?

There is no need for the prosecution to prove that a person was likely to drive whilst unfit or over the limit. It is for the Defendant to prove that there is no prospect of using the vehicle.


What if I fell asleep in the car or I was sitting in the back?

It depends on the circumstances leading up to it. If somebody else had driven the vehicle, and has merely got out and left you in it, and you were not aware of this, you are not in charge. If, however, you had, by your own means got into the car you would have been in charge and remain in charge.


Can I be prosecuted if I am sitting in the passenger seat?

Yes. If the Police believe that you were driving at some point, but when they stopped the vehicle, you were no longer driving, it is still possible to prosecute or if the Police are able to show that there was a likelihood of you driving the vehicle. You do not have to be sitting in the driver's seat to be "in charge".


Chrz Mul

p.s. And lastly, because of the world we live in - All the information above constitutes a personal opinion and is not professional legal advice.

yes and thats how my uncle got dunyears back in bangor as the car was on main st and he came out of a club about 300 yds away pissed with the keys in his pocket,charge ,drunk in charge.

 

[trevskoda]

with out the key.
david if that were so then it also would not require ins tax etc,whether the key is there or not its a mec propelled vh as made for road use ,i do see where you are comming from but its a lost case just hope no folk here are silly and get nailed.

 

[trevskoda]

Phew, I was just about click "like" but thought that might come across as insensitive given both the words of your post and it's meaning ! So how about "we're on the same page"

never liked him served him right anyway as he was always a skunken dkut.

 

[izwozral]

You get these articulated lorries with drop sides at festivals that dispense beer etc so I guess a MH could be used to dispense beer?

 

[Fazerloz]

Get a Temporary Events Notice and a Personal Alcohol Licence and off you go. :cheers:

 

[yorkslass]

Enough to drive you to drink:cheers::cheers::cheers: