Are you in charge of a car if just sitting in the driver's seat with engine off?

wazza

When i can i watch the police show on cable/tv. Basically UK traffic police. Makes me laugh/boil when some police officers act tough or provoke people. But overall they do a good job.

Sometimes i wonder what they say/claim is true or not. On night a patrol car stops by a parked car which still had ocupants. The car has been parked there for a while. A guy was in the driver's seat and the key was not in the ignition. Since it was not his car he had no insurance. He claims it was his friend's car. The officer was saying that he was going to charge him for being in control of a car without insurance because he was sitting in the driving seat. Was the officer lying?

If the officer was correct then where does one stand if sitting in mates new car in the driving seat etc

mcjordi

technically your in control of the car.. was this police interceptors by any chance

KillerWatt

In order for a person to be deemed in "control" of a motor vehicle, they need to have the keys on them (or in the ignition if they are sat in the driving seat).

wazza

mcjordi wrote: »

technically your in control of the car.. was this police interceptors by any chance

i think it was. Think the officer saw a car go around a corner one night and then they saw this car parked up. Don't think they could identify the car before seeing this parked car

raskazz

KillerWatt wrote: »

In order for a person to be deemed in "control" of a motor vehicle, they need to have the keys on them (or in the ignition if they are sat in the driving seat).

The offence is under Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act, which states:

"Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act— (a) a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act"

Note that it makes no reference to 'control' of the vehicle, rather use. Nor does a person have to be in possession of the keys, or be driving a vehicle, to be 'using' the vehicle (a vehicle rolling downhill with the engine switched off is being 'used', as in the case of Saycell v Bond; and a vehicle parked and unattended in the road is being 'used' by the owner, as in the case of Andrews v Kershaw).

To be the 'user' of a motor vehicle under the Act requires some element of controlling, managing or operating the vehicle (Brown v Roberts). Certainly if the owner of the vehicle was not in the vicinity of the car, and especially if the person in the driver's seat was in possession of the keys (even if they weren't in the ignition), then a person sitting in the driver's seat could be argued to be 'in control of/managing' and therefore using the vehicle. I don't think there are any relevant cases to clarify that though.

Lum

On this topic it should be pointed out that this definition of use also applies when making a drink driving charge.

If you decide to sleep in your car because you're too !!!!ed to drive home, you can be done for drunk driving, and the police do actually do this. You're actually less likely to get caught if you drive home, but obviously more likely to kill someone.

Kilty_2

How do you avoid such a drink driving charge? Would the keys need to be with someone else who is not in the vehicle?

Gavin83

I was caught sitting in the drivers seat of my car, with the keys in the ignition while under the influence. The car wasn't on as such, but the electrics were as I was listening to the radio. I didn't get charged with anything but they did tell me at the time they could have done if they'd wanted to. I didn't believe them to be honest but clearly I was wrong.

ginnersinner

Lum wrote: »

On this topic it should be pointed out that this definition of use also applies when making a drink driving charge.

If you decide to sleep in your car because you're too !!!!ed to drive home, you can be done for drunk driving, and the police do actually do this. You're actually less likely to get caught if you drive home, but obviously more likely to kill someone.

As often happens, different topics are getting confused here, and it seems the Police have done the same.

As raskazz has eloquently described, the offence of no insurance involves using an uninsured vehicle on a road. The question of whether sitting in the driver's seat constitutes 'using' is a matter of fact for the court to decide.

In drink driving, there are three offences. 1-Driving, 2-attempting to driver and 3-being in charge of - a motor vehicle whilst over the prescribed limit.

In relation to 'in charge', while there is no legal definition of exactly what constitutes 'in charge', there is a defence contained within the road traffic act as follows:-

Road_Traffic_Act_1988_Sec_5 wrote:

(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection(1)(b) (in charge) 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.

Therefore if you have the keys in your pocket and you're walking home from the pub, and your car is on your driveway, it would be fairly easy for you to show that there was no likelihood of you driving it. If you're in a car park having walked there from the pub, and you get stopped on the way, that would be much more difficult.

'In contol' is another term which has evolved from 'driving' and has actually been defined through case law. To be 'driving' or 'in control' you have to 'have substantial control of the direction and speed of the car'

TakingNotes, you MAY be 'in charge' or not, it would depend entirely on the circumstances.

Paradigm

Lum wrote: »

On this topic it should be pointed out that this definition of use also applies when making a drink driving charge.

If you decide to sleep in your car because you're too !!!!ed to drive home, you can be done for drunk driving, and the police do actually do this. You're actually less likely to get caught if you drive home, but obviously more likely to kill someone.

There was a thread on pepipoo regarding this & I seem to remember that there is a defence to being "drunk in charge" of a vehicle as opposed to actual drink driving.

I'll try & find it.

Edit: Memo to self... must post quicker

Hammyman

Yes you are. The problem lorry drivers have is that for many of them, its also their home from Monday to Friday which means they can't go and enjoy a few beers on a night time after they've finished work without risking the possibility of prosecution for drunk in charge of a vehicle, even though they're in bed.