Driving without Insurance and Special Reasons Proof at Glasgow JP Court.  Our client has been employed as a driver for the last 20 or so years.  She was charged with driving without insurance by the police.  Driving without insurance carries a minimum of 6 penalty points and possible disqualification.  She was adamant that she was insured and that he police had made a mistake.  She was devastated to discover that the police hadn’t made a mistake and that her insurance policy had been cancelled due to an error.  Her car was impounded and she was very worried that she would lose her job if she got 6 or more points because she was employed as a driver. The whole circumstances about how her insurance came to be cancelled were very confusing, but following enquiries with her bank and insurance company we able to identify a way of persuading the court not to endorse her licence with any penalty points.  This followed a hearing, called a Special reasons Proof, where evidence was presented before the court and where Dominic Sellar made legal submissions before the court about the circumstance in which a court can establish that there are special reasons for not endorsing a licence.  That was the view that the court took in this case and our client was delighted by the outcome.

Mobile Phone case at Coatbridge JP Court.  Our Client was charged by the police with using a mobile phone while driving.  He position was that he was merely moving the phone from a jacket pocket to the central console.  He may have looked at the screen, but he denied that he was actually using it.  His position was accepted and he was acquitted of the offence.

Dangerous Driving on M74 at Dumfries Sheriff Court.  Our client was charges with driving at excessive speed on the M74 in bad weather conditions and undertaking other motor vehicles.  A conviction for dangerous driving would mean automatic disqualification for no less that one year.  Our client accepted that his speed was high, but not as high as the police suggested.  This was a classic case in which the police originally recorded a speed on a Unipar device of under 100mph and then followed the driver.  During this the police suggested that the speed had increased to over 100mph and based this on the factory fitted speedometer.  In these circumstances there is no exact reading and the evidence is wholly based on the police estimating the speed of a car on their observations and with reference to their own speedo.  This practice is open to abuse at worst and human error at best.  The case was resolved at the trial diet, when Mr Sellar was able to persuade the Crown to accept a plea to the lesser charge of Careless Driving.  The court dealt with the case by way of penalty points and our client kept his licence.

Driving without insurance & Special Reasons Proof at Lanark JP Court.  Our client was charged with driving his wife’s car without insurance.  The case called in the JP court in Lanark.  Our client had 6 live penalty points from two previous speeding offence.  Driving without insurance carries a minimum of 6 points so our client was facing disqualification under the totting-up provisions.   He wanted a specialist road traffic who had experience of appearing at Lanark JP Court.  He contacted us and we were immediately able to identify a way to avoid disqualification based on the information he gave to us.  He thought he was insured and had an honest and genuine belief that he was insured to drive the car.  The matter proceed to proof and Dominic Sellar was able to present reliable evidence that satisfied the court about his client’s position.  In these circumstances, the court made a finding of Special Reasons and no penalty points were endorsed on our client’s licence.

Speeding Case at Falkirk JP Court.  Our client was charged with speeding on the M80.  The speed was captured by a mobile camera van.  Our client depended on his licence and did not want any penalty points on his licence.  The case was continued and adjourned on a number of occasions.  Ultimately it proceed to trial, but shortly after starting the Crown conceded that a technical issues raised by Mr Sellar could not be remedied .  In these circumstances the case was deserted and our client was acquired.

Dangerous Driving Charge at Hamilton Sheriff Court.  Our client was charged with dangerous driving in Hamilton by failing to stop when required to do so, speeding and causing persons to take evasive action to avoid being struck by his motor car.  Clearly this was a serious allegation that would have resulted in disqualification for a lengthy period of time.  Having investigated the case we were satisfied that the evidence was exaggerated, although, in our view, the standard of driving was careless.  Given this we approached the Crown and offered to plead guilty to the lesser charge of Careless Driving.  The plea was refused and the matter proceeded to trial.  A number of technical issues were raised by Mr Sellar and after two days of evidence the court was persuaded to accept that the standard of driving was not dangerous.  A finding of Careless Driving was made by the court and penalty points and a fine were imposed.  Our client, who is a HGV driver, was delighted.  Not only did he keep his licence, but he also kept his job.

Careless and Inconsiderate Driving at Falkirk JP Court. Our client, who is a HGV driver, was charged with careless and inconsiderate driving by failing to take proper observations when pulling out from a junction into the path of car and causing a collision. The main evidence against him came from the driver of the car and another driver who witnessed the incident. When the police arrived the crash scene analysis concluded that the HGV driver was to blame.
Our client denied the allegation against him the defence were able to demonstrate that this was simply an accident having regard to the relative speed and distance travelled by the vehicles and the spread of debris resulting from the collision.
The case was dismissed and our client kept his driving licence and his job.

Dangerous Driving Charge (Section 2 Road Traffic Act 1988) at Paisley Sheriff Court. A conviction would have resulted in a mandatory period of disqualification for a least one year.

Dominic Sellar represented a client charged with dangerous on a section of the M8 between Paisley and Glasgow. Among other things it was alleged that that the client drove at grossly excessive speed in bad weather, tailgating and undertaking other cars. The case proceeded to trial at Paisley Sheriff Court with evidence for two police officers. In addition the evidence of the police described the driving as extremely aggressive and caused other drivers to take evasive action to avoid a collision. The client denied all the allegations and gave evidence in his own defence.

The Sheriff found him Not Guilty.

Drink Driving case at Perth Sheriff Court. We were not initially involved at the beginning of this case. The client had appeared from custody at court and pled guilty to drink driving with a very high reading of 136 microgrammes of alcohol in his breath. The limit is 22 microgrammes! To make matters worse he had one previous conviction for drink driving. Sentence was put back for reports and he was facing a prison sentence. He then called us for help to avoid a prison sentence. We were able to establish that he had consumed a quantity of alcohol after driving and that the reading to which he had pled guilty was misleading. The client avoided a prison sentence and was delighted with the outcome.

Drink Driving case at Airdrie Sheriff Court. The client had appeared from custody and pled guilty to his third drink driving offence. The Court was considering a prison sentence and deferred sentence for background reports. The client called us to represent him at court. His main concern was avoiding a custodial sentence. Following our representations at court he avoided a prison sentence.