Man, 26, still driving with 176 points on licence

[Tindersticks]

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/nov/04/more...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/04/man-26...

How the hell do you keep your licence?

[borcy]

Reading that he may have been banned.


Points remain on licences for up to 11 years after an offence is committed, meaning some people with multiple driving convictions are legally allowed behind the wheel because they have served a period of disqualification.

[Tindersticks]

That is going some for a 26 year old though.

[borcy]

I know, what's the most you can get in one go (realistically) 12?

[bucksmanuk]

Its 3 points every 6 weeks!

Not exactly learning from his mistakes is he?

[Tindersticks]

borcy said:

I know, what's the most you can get in one go (realistically) 12?

I think so - and I always assumed that would be a straight ban unless you can show exceptional hardship (at which point I'd be driving like Miss Daisy forever)

[Digger]

Man maths. . .

Points Win Prizes!

[JagLad]

borcy said:

Reading that he may have been banned.


Points remain on licences for up to 11 years after an offence is committed, meaning some people with multiple driving convictions are legally allowed behind the wheel because they have served a period of disqualification.

That's not quite correct.

When a driver serves a ban under the "totting up" process, although the endorsements which led to that ban remain on his driving record for the prescribed period (which, for the majority of offences is four years), his points total reverts to zero.

This is why I don't understand it when I read reports of people still driving with such a large number of points. If a driver is allowed to continue to drive after facing a totting up ban (because he successfully argued "exceptional hardship) he will face a totting up ban again as soon as he is sentenced for another offence (provided none of his earlier points have become inactive during that time). He cannot make a second EH argument using the same reasons within three years.

If the ban was imposed for for a single offence (either because it was an offence carrying a mandatory disqualification or the court thought a discretionary ban was appropriate) then no points are involved and any that he had before that ban remain in force.

Even if every offence attracted six points (and not many do, with even fewer attracting more than that) it would mean that at least 30 offences must have been committed. So I'd be interested to learn how somebody can accumulate 176 "active" points and not face a totting up ban. The only way I can think that might happen is if the driver committed a very large number of offences before facing sentencing, had them all dealt with at once and then successfully made an EH argument. But even that seems beyond credibility.

[Doofus]

JagLad said:

He cannot make a second EH argument using the same reasons within three years.

Why not?

I'd have thought that if the reasons remain, then so does the EH argument.

[Pachydermus]

Doofus said:

Why not?

I'd have thought that if the reasons remain, then so does the EH argument.

presumably because you're meant to learn from your mistakes and not use it as a "get out of jail free" card.

[mac96]

I wonder whether all these individuals with lots of points actually have terrible accident records - I'd be more worried about people who have dozens of accidents than those who have loads of points.
And of course there is no record of that!

[Doofus]

Pachydermus said:

Doofus said:

Why not?

I'd have thought that if the reasons remain, then so does the EH argument.

presumably because you're meant to learn from your mistakes and not use it as a "get out of jail free" card.

But if you're able to rack up 176 points, then it seems that you don't have to learn anything.

[agtlaw]

JagLad said:

Nonsense

Ignore this walt. He belongs on the Foolish Legal Advice Forum. Only a fool would listen to his "legal advice."

[JagLad]

Doofus said:

Why not?

I'd have thought that if the reasons remain, then so does the EH argument.

Mainly because the law says not.

[agtlaw]

Tindersticks said:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/nov/04/more...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/04/man-26...

How the hell do you keep your licence?

My guess is 28x fail to give driver information offences with 8 'live' points for no insurance. Changed address and didn't update V5C. Multiple underlying offences committed on the same day and all within a short period. Possible that the person convicted was not the driver. Defendant argued exceptional hardship / mitigating circumstances on one occasion only.

[Tindersticks]

Thanks. Seems insane to have those sorts of numbers.

[Antony Moxey]

I reckon if you went on a reasonably long motorway journey and went through a number of smart sections and roadworks without dropping below 85-90mph you could accumulate quite a few points on the same day.

[JagLad]

agtlaw said:

My guess is 28x fail to give driver information offences with 8 'live' points for no insurance. Changed address and didn't update V5C. Multiple underlying offences committed on the same day and all within a short period. Possible that the person convicted was not the driver. Defendant argued exceptional hardship / mitigating circumstances on one occasion only.

It's as good an explanation as any (and similar in principle to mine, which you dismissed as "nonsense").

[agtlaw]

JagLad said:

t would mean that at least 30 offences must have been committed.

Walt.

[Oceanrower]

Tindersticks said:

I think so - and I always assumed that would be a straight ban unless you can show exceptional hardship (at which point I'd be driving like Miss Daisy forever)

Miss Daisy didn’t drive. That was kind of the whole point of it…