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

Paradigm

Here http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=50124&hl=drunk

Judas

The defence would have to be that you had no intention of using/controlling the car and where simply sitting in it.

If the keys where on you and you were in the drivers seat would be hard to argue that you were not in control of the car.

Would probably come down to a court to decide on reliability of facts and witnesses.

Evilm

I worked with a person whose brother got a Drink Driving conviction... by going to sleep on the back seat of the car with the keys in his pocket!

I think the only way you could get round it would be to put the keys through the door of a local business you expect to be open the next day (or leave them with the bartender) after unlocking the car and then going to sleep on the backseat - no keys, not in control of the car. (and I'm not even sure if that would work).

Paradigm

Evilm wrote: »

I worked with a person whose brother got a Drink Driving conviction... by going to sleep on the back seat of the car with the keys in his pocket!

I think the only way you could get round it would be to put the keys through the door of a local business you expect to be open the next day (or leave them with the bartender) after unlocking the car and then going to sleep on the backseat - no keys, not in control of the car. (and I'm not even sure if that would work).

I'm sure it does happen but I'd say that's more because they didn't present (or didn't have) a believable defence on the "intention to drive" bit mentioned in ginnersinners post above!

A scenario....

You've hired a motorhome & park up for the night next to a pub, as you're on holiday you have a few beers then go to bed in the motorhome. At 2 am the police wake you & you're breathalysed... over the limit!
You're in charge of the vehicle & "drunk" there's no arguing that but did you have any intention to drive?

jamespir

its intent to use a car though

Paradigm

jamespir wrote: »

its intent to use a car though

What is?

If this is in response to the OPs question I'll admit I don't know the answer. I would think it would take a good solicitor to make sense of the legislation & the exact charge.

Lum

Reading that entire thread has really wound me up. I didn't realise that even going out to get something off the back seat is enough to prove drunk in charge.

From now on I'm going to have to remote unlock the car and leave my keys on the windowsill if I need to do that. What a stupid law.

Paradigm

Lum wrote: »

Reading that entire thread has really wound me up. I didn't realise that even going out to get something off the back seat is enough to prove drunk in charge.

From now on I'm going to have to remote unlock the car and leave my keys on the windowsill if I need to do that. What a stupid law.

Yes it is! As stated in the thread "the law only bends one way"!

jamespir

Paradigm wrote: »

What is?

If this is in response to the OPs question I'll admit I don't know the answer. I would think it would take a good solicitor to make sense of the legislation & the exact charge.

if you have the keys and your sat in the drivers seat they calss that as intent to use the car

as you have either stopped using it or you intend to use itat some point

Paradigm

jamespir wrote: »

if you have the keys and your sat in the drivers seat they calss that as intent to use the car

as you have either stopped using it or you intend to use itat some point

They might class it as that, it doesn't mean it is that! Just because the police say it's so doesn't mean it is.

If you read the pepipoo thread you would have expected a ban...he didn't get one!