Drug driving help
Discussion
Hi all.
Can I just start off by saying that I dont agree with drink / drug drivers, and if this friend of mine was not a very good friend I would have refused to help him.
He got pulled over in my old home town of Reading with a small amount of cannabis on him. He has been pulled over before and cautioned with the same thing. He was given a caution by the police officer and that seemed to be that.
Couple of weeks later he was sent a letter by the DVLA stating that he needed to take a urine test as the officer had sent off stating he was "not fit to drive through drugs".
He had his urine test 28 days later and heard 2 weeks after that (now) by letter from the DVLA that he had been declared unfit to drive through drugs and his license has been revoked for 6 months.
Now just a couple of points that I would appricate greatly if you could all help...
1) Does the DVLA have the power to revoke a license under these conditions? I thought it had to be a magistrates court.
2) Is it worth appealing against it after, say, 3 months or so? He has told me he is going to give up drugs totally so in theory his system should be clean by then.
3) What would constitute "medically unfit to drive"? He was pulled over on a standard check. He was not pulled over for anything else.
Your thoughts please.
SoulPatch
Can I just start off by saying that I dont agree with drink / drug drivers, and if this friend of mine was not a very good friend I would have refused to help him.
He got pulled over in my old home town of Reading with a small amount of cannabis on him. He has been pulled over before and cautioned with the same thing. He was given a caution by the police officer and that seemed to be that.
Couple of weeks later he was sent a letter by the DVLA stating that he needed to take a urine test as the officer had sent off stating he was "not fit to drive through drugs".
He had his urine test 28 days later and heard 2 weeks after that (now) by letter from the DVLA that he had been declared unfit to drive through drugs and his license has been revoked for 6 months.
Now just a couple of points that I would appricate greatly if you could all help...
1) Does the DVLA have the power to revoke a license under these conditions? I thought it had to be a magistrates court.
2) Is it worth appealing against it after, say, 3 months or so? He has told me he is going to give up drugs totally so in theory his system should be clean by then.
3) What would constitute "medically unfit to drive"? He was pulled over on a standard check. He was not pulled over for anything else.
Your thoughts please.
SoulPatch
I don't understand this one. You say he was pulled over and was found to be in possesion of cannabis. How does that make him unfit to drive through drugs. Is it just the statement of a police officer to that effect? I wouldn't have thought you could tell 28 days later whether he was stoned out of his mind, or hadn't touched the stuff in weeks. 
Is a positive drug test 28 days later, and the statement of a police officer (not based on any test) sufficient evidence to prove someone is 'Not capable to drive through drugs' (or whatever the phrase is)?
Is a positive drug test 28 days later, and the statement of a police officer (not based on any test) sufficient evidence to prove someone is 'Not capable to drive through drugs' (or whatever the phrase is)?
It is interesting isnt it.
He did a drug test on the spot when he was stopped in the presence of a doctor and he passed.
There were no circumstances of being "unfit" to drive in any way.
I am very concerned about this case as I think it has larger implications. It means that the police can do what they want effectivly.
He did a drug test on the spot when he was stopped in the presence of a doctor and he passed.
There were no circumstances of being "unfit" to drive in any way.
I am very concerned about this case as I think it has larger implications. It means that the police can do what they want effectivly.
k him over even more. 
incredible!
the guy passes a test on the spot, ( so they can't throw him in the cells for DD ), then presumably the DVLA are revoking his license on medical grounds?
how many middle aged women on anti-depressants are there on the road ( never mind the OAPs )?
that is disgusting, whatever your opinion on canabis, anyone who drinks even occaisionally should therefore hand in their license to the local nazis.
what the f**k is going on in this country?
the guy passes a test on the spot, ( so they can't throw him in the cells for DD ), then presumably the DVLA are revoking his license on medical grounds?
how many middle aged women on anti-depressants are there on the road ( never mind the OAPs )?
that is disgusting, whatever your opinion on canabis, anyone who drinks even occaisionally should therefore hand in their license to the local nazis.
what the f**k is going on in this country?
This is stupid.
If he had been sat in a room full of people smoking dope then that would be enough to show up in a urine test. Therefore he could have been over a limit without knowing it. Added to which the fact that he was tested 28 days later just adds insult to injury because testing so late after the event proves nothing.
The fact that he was caught with it is neither here nor there really, he wasnt smoking whilst he was driving.
How do the DVLA have the power to take away his license without trial? Surely even if you are caught having shot someome, with a smoking gun and a body you are still entitled to a trial? Whilst I appreciate that the DVLA have the power to revoke on medical grounds this is nothing of the sort. Due to the illegality of cannabis there has been no studies into the safe level of useage when driving so what they seem to have done here is stuck a finger in the air and made some sort or arbitary decision.
The myopic nature of this nation and its policies really is quite startling.
Matt.
>> Edited by plotloss on Thursday 14th November 13:26
If he had been sat in a room full of people smoking dope then that would be enough to show up in a urine test. Therefore he could have been over a limit without knowing it. Added to which the fact that he was tested 28 days later just adds insult to injury because testing so late after the event proves nothing.
The fact that he was caught with it is neither here nor there really, he wasnt smoking whilst he was driving.
How do the DVLA have the power to take away his license without trial? Surely even if you are caught having shot someome, with a smoking gun and a body you are still entitled to a trial? Whilst I appreciate that the DVLA have the power to revoke on medical grounds this is nothing of the sort. Due to the illegality of cannabis there has been no studies into the safe level of useage when driving so what they seem to have done here is stuck a finger in the air and made some sort or arbitary decision.
The myopic nature of this nation and its policies really is quite startling.
Matt.
>> Edited by plotloss on Thursday 14th November 13:26
how am I supposed to get my booze back from tesco now, if I have some bottles of plonk in the boot then I must be unfit to drive cos I'm pissed as a fart. This is about as immoral as it gets, your friend must fight this with whatever weapon he has at his disposal...I f**king would.....in fact let's have a whip round for a brief for him, there's probably some on here who could give some helpul advice 
This happens quite often.
If for instance you admit to your GP that you use cannabis they may well tell the DVLA and are entitled to do so. The DVLA can then revoke your licence, and /or require you to have urine tests at regular intervals for ever...
As has been pointed out, your insurance will go upupupupupupupupup...
If for instance you admit to your GP that you use cannabis they may well tell the DVLA and are entitled to do so. The DVLA can then revoke your licence, and /or require you to have urine tests at regular intervals for ever...
As has been pointed out, your insurance will go upupupupupupupupup...
In theory he could have gone abroad since being pulled and found OK, and smoked it legally surely?
Why would this mean the DVLA could take his license away?
Does this mean anybody caught for possession automtically has their license revoked?
If he was tested 28 days later and found positive (was he?) on what grounds were the tests administered?
All sounds very unjust.
Cheers, Phil
Why would this mean the DVLA could take his license away?
Does this mean anybody caught for possession automtically has their license revoked?
If he was tested 28 days later and found positive (was he?) on what grounds were the tests administered?
All sounds very unjust.
Cheers, Phil
tallchris99 said: This happens quite often.
If for instance you admit to your GP that you use cannabis they may well tell the DVLA and are entitled to do so. The DVLA can then revoke your licence, and /or require you to have urine tests at regular intervals for ever...
As has been pointed out, your insurance will go upupupupupupupupup...
When he was stopped he would have said it was for personal use (unless he was completely mad and admitted to dealing). Therefore, he becomes a self confessed drug user, and if not the police then the doctor present would report that fact to the DVLA. It's then as the above quote.
He will almost certainly qualify for Legal Aid, so see a solicitor, either way he'll get a free half hour. Or try the CAB for advice.
My sister collapsed in the local library and was taken to hospital. They diagnosed Epilepsy and they notified the DVLA and she lost her licence immediately based on that first diagnosis, and her job, as it involved driving
So yes the DVLA can do it....it's getting it back that's the hard part. He will need prove that he's clean, his doctor may help with this. He will also need to be tested again in 6 months anyway, failing then will result in another 6 months ban.
Andy
So does this mean that if I go to Amsterdam and have a bit of a smoke legally then I should have my license removed on my return !!! This is ridiculous.
As the government think that over 60% of us have smoked cannibus at some time anyway, then why not just scrap cars altogether and be done with it.
As the government think that over 60% of us have smoked cannibus at some time anyway, then why not just scrap cars altogether and be done with it.
sparkey said: So does this mean that if I go to Amsterdam and have a bit of a smoke legally then I should have my license removed on my return !!! This is ridiculous.
As the government think that over 60% of us have smoked cannibus at some time anyway, then why not just scrap cars altogether and be done with it.
Nah!
Unless you get stopped on your return and your still under the influence of said substance, in which case you're DUI.
If his mate had stayed clean after the stop, then the test would have been negative and none of this would have happened. 28 days later this guys testing positive, so it's confirmed he is a drug user. OK he might have stayed clean for 27 days then thought sod it, but that's the nature of random testing, poor bugger.
Andy
He should not have offered any information at all regarding who/what the cannabis was for.
Keep shtumn and let a good solicitor sort it out, never make any admissions at all regarding this type of thing...
Oh and if you must carry cannabis whilst out and about, put it in your pants, cops are still homophobic enough to not want to grope your crotch without very good reason.
Keep shtumn and let a good solicitor sort it out, never make any admissions at all regarding this type of thing...
Oh and if you must carry cannabis whilst out and about, put it in your pants, cops are still homophobic enough to not want to grope your crotch without very good reason.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff