About to lose my licence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AllTerr

Not knowing the laws on that here (asked the wife and she wasn't sure either) did you go on suspension the date of the offence? So in other words, if you did, would it count towards the penalty in a "time served" sense?( I.E., Oct - now = 3 months toward the 6 month penalty), or did you keep it until court?

---

Good question.
I could have (and on reflection, SHOULD have) taken 28 days from the date I was caught to get my affairs in order and then handed in my licence to VicRoads. Had I done this I still would have lost my job, but I’d be 3 months into my disqualification by now.

Many people told me that I should go to court as I may get off a little lighter so that is what I did.

I spoke to several lawyers who all told me that this would not be the case, that magistrates have no discretion in DUI. Unfortunately I found this out AFTER the 28 days had elapsed.

Thanks for all the posts of support guys, they are appreciated.

I was dumb and now have to pay the price, but my original point still remains, why can someone who carries out a criminal offence such as assault or robbery get a good behaviour bond or similar yet a traffic offence gets an arbitrary sentence?

Sitting in court waiting for my case to come up there was an Asian guy with poor English who had been pulled up doing more than 25k over the limit. This gets you an automatic 1 mth suspension in Vic. He got caught again at a similar speed and was driving whilst suspended this time........ poor English your honour...... 6 mths good behaviour and NO fine! This probably illustrates my point better than any anecdote.

Anyway, it is what it is. At least I avoided a bloody interlock!

A warning to everyone now:

As of 1st Jan 2018, the rules have changed. No longer do you have to be OVER .05. The rule now is .05 AND ABOVE. Also, ALL people convicted will have to have an interlock fitted for a period equivalent to the cancellation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wardy1

Good question.
I could have (and on reflection, SHOULD have) taken 28 days from the date I was caught to get my affairs in order and then handed in my licence to VicRoads. Had I done this I still would have lost my job, but I’d be 3 months into my disqualification by now.

Many people told me that I should go to court as I may get off a little lighter so that is what I did.

I spoke to several lawyers who all told me that this would not be the case, that magistrates have no discretion in DUI. Unfortunately I found this out AFTER the 28 days had elapsed.

Thanks for all the posts of support guys, they are appreciated.

I was dumb and now have to pay the price, but my original point still remains, why can someone who carries out a criminal offence such as assault or robbery get a good behaviour bond or similar yet a traffic offence gets an arbitrary sentence?

Sitting in court waiting for my case to come up there was an Asian guy with poor English who had been pulled up doing more than 25k over the limit. This gets you an automatic 1 mth suspension in Vic. He got caught again at a similar speed and was driving whilst suspended this time........ poor English your honour...... 6 mths good behaviour and NO fine! This probably illustrates my point better than any anecdote.

Anyway, it is what it is. At least I avoided a bloody interlock!

A warning to everyone now:

As of 1st Jan 2018, the rules have changed. No longer do you have to be OVER .05. The rule now is .05 AND ABOVE. Also, ALL people convicted will have to have an interlock fitted for a period equivalent to the cancellation.

---

If the interlock is fitted at the same time as the disqualification, that would assume the person is expected to try to drive while disqualified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

If the interlock is fitted at the same time as the disqualification, that would assume the person is expected to try to drive while disqualified.

---

It gets fitted when you get your licence back

Similar experience in QLD, with my daughter being charged with "Driving with undue care and attention".

The experience taught us one thing, GET A SOLICITOR.

I say that because there's a whole theory about what to say and what not to say in court, the solicitor can advise you on that.

I know they will cost $1500 ish, but GET A SOLICITOR

Cheers,
John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnboyLandy

Similar experience in QLD, with my daughter being charged with "Driving with undue care and attention".

The experience taught us one thing, GET A SOLICITOR.

I say that because there's a whole theory about what to say and what not to say in court, the solicitor can advise you on that.

I know they will cost $1500 ish, but GET A SOLICITOR

Cheers,
John

---

I spoke to 4 different lawyers. They all told me the same, that the disqualification is mandatory. The only thing they said they MIGHT achieve was to get the fine reduced. I did this myself. It would have cost me about $1100 to save $350.

Bummer, must differ between the states.

All the best
John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wardy1

I spoke to 4 different lawyers. They all told me the same, that the disqualification is mandatory. The only thing they said they MIGHT achieve was to get the fine reduced. I did this myself. It would have cost me about $1100 to save $350.

---

Hi, here in the UK the minimum ban is 12 months. I know 2 people who got caught, set up by others. One deserved it, but still got his father in law to drive him around. He, like you, was a sales rep. The other got set up by a recently dumped boyfriend. She got her mother over from Poland to drive her. Recently I lost my licence for 6 months due to a medical problem. I could in fact drive but was not allowed to. So, until I got my licence back colleagues very kindly gave me lifts, and I paid towards fuel.

Do you not know someone you could pay to drive you? Even if you had to take out a loan to do it, at least you would keep your job, home etc. What about a young unemployed person? A loan is a pain but job loss is worse. Do hope you sort yourself out. As others have said, there but for the grace of God go so many of us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wardy1

In October last year I was caught at an RBT. I Blew 0.086. I had enjoyed 3 glasses of white wine 2 hours before. A warning to all, when we drink at home (according to the officer), the drinks we drink are substantially larger than those we may be served at a licensed establishment. Most he says are nearly double a standard drink. So effectively I may have had 6 standard drinks...... over the period of time, most of us would say we’re ok right?

WRONG

Now I’m prepared to cop what is coming to me, which will be a 6mth cancellation plus a fine. I’m not denying the charge. The reason for posting this is totally separate from this.

As a consequence of a conviction/cancellation I will lose my job. In Victoria there is no “licence to work”, which means I lose my job immediately. This in turn means zero income which in turn means that I will lose the place I live. Many here know that I’m single these days so there is no other income to pay the bills. Hence, I lose my home and whatever else.

I see people who have committed crimes against others or property and they get good behaviour bonds etc. I commit a Minor offence and stand to lose the lot!

Is this fair? Is it justice?

BTW, I’ve been driving almost 44 years and never had more than a speeding fine <10k over.

Until it happens to you, you don’t think too much about it I guess, but the penalty I now face seems way outside the crime.
Interested to hear your opinions

---

A lawyer once told me to always avoid court if possible, because "only criminals get justice".

Totally agree with the below post. SA was also .08 for many years. And the metabolism thing is obviously more complicated than just size. Myself and three similarly sized and aged mates drank exactly the same rounds one night and then tested our BACs...VERY different results. There's a little bit of science in .05 but it is also arbitrary in that it needs to try to account for the 'average' person and in a fairly conservative way. I'm sure we all know people who are completely coherent after 10 drinks and those who are tipsy after one.

I agree that a limit has to be set in some form but am also amazed that there is no option to use your licence for work purposes - certainly that has been in the case in other jurisdictions and I know someone who had this arrangement.

The distraction of mobile phone use can be worse than low-level drink driving, but more difficult to enforce and so it continues to occur, largely unabated...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johntins

I have to ask: was that also your opinion when Victoria was .05, and WA was .08? .086 would not have even registered then. I'll bet you know people, perhaps even yourself, who sailed close to the wind, who would have been illegal here in Vic. Please note: I am NOt having a go at you personally, I am just illustrating a point.

The .05 thing is a line in the sand. Many, many people operate quite well at levels far above .05. This is demonstrated by the fact that very many jurisdictions, including WA until a little while ago, accepted .08 as being the limit. .05 was popularised by Peter Brock, but it is merely an arbitrary number chosen to maximise the revenue from the fines. Most people can be .05+ without realising it, which is why it suits legislators, apart from the mathematical symmetry of it.

Now, before you all jump down my throat, consider this: In my professional life, I have always had to be .00 ( well, not all my professional life. BCA tests came in long after I started driving, but you get my drift, I hope ). .00 is easy to work out. So, why not make the test for everyone .00? If I have had a drink in, let's say, 8 hours, then I am not .00. There are no grey areas. It is quite easy to work out, and people, like poor Wardy here, would know that they can't drive. No? I'll tell you why. The Police would not need to spend massive $$$ on big fancy vans, the Politicians would have nothing to talk about ( I wish ), and there would be no hotels, apart from places like Balmain. The whole concept is unpalatable to the plebs who watch ACA.

I want to tell a story to illustrate how silly it is to jump on someone for a mistake. Because we can all make them.

Here we go: when my first wife and I got divorced, some time ago, we, that is my girlfriend, my then former wife and I, decided to go from 570 Bourke St up to the Windsor Hotel for a celebratory drink. ( Best not to ask about the girlfriend/former wife thing ) When we left, separately, I was pulled in for a RBT. Sure, things were different then, but I was passed, did not register. What I did not know was, the girlfriend, who had pretty much what I had to drink, had been pulled in as well. She registered .17, and in Vic in those days that meant she lost her licence for 17 months. We had drunk similar amounts. It is likely I had more than her..

Now, you can make of that story what you will. You can believe it or not. I put it up here to point out that blood alcohol levels vary from person to person, per drink consumed, by body weight and sex. Women are more likely to register a high reading than men, and it's not just about body weight. The fact that women menstruate plays a part.

My size ( 100 kg currently ), my metabolism ( quick ) all have a bearing on my ability to deal with alcohol. I am sure you are different. That is precisely why you should not judge someone who has at least had the courage to tell his story. Wardy's story is a "there but the grace of God" situation, and I encourage you all to reflect on that. Are YOU perfect?

---

I empathise with Wardy and I don't think you were looking for sympathy but raising what had happened for discussion. You certainly triggered some thoughts and emotion in me. 35 plus years ago and pre random breath tests, me and my mates would consistently drink and drive. We had the theory then that if you drove perfectly then they couldn't pull you over - young, naive and stupid! Luckily none of us came unstuck - worst story I remember was a mate turning up at my place next morning after a party we had, looking for fuel - he left the night before, pulled over he was so drunk and then fell asleep - forgot to turn car off and ran out of fuel. Random breath tests saw me be very particular from then on and right to today I have a one light beer limit - I just won't risk my licence.

I do remember though SA being .08 and holding out when there was pressure from the Feds, connected to road funding, to drop it to .05. At the time they had research from Flinders University that there was no correlation between the numbers of accidents with those in that range - something like that - but the argument was not to change. But as suggested you make a lot more money if you make it .05 - whether it is the correct limit or not. Similarly I keep hearing mates getting pinged for speeding with lower and lower margins, despite manufacturers only needing to produce a car that is accurate to 10%.

I had a tenant who i later discovered her partner was an ice addict. I gave her/them the place over others because she was heavily pregnant, their previous lease had ended beyond their control - previous landlord and referree confirming - only later to discover it was his mother and it was all bull****. It was a very stressful few years, in constant fear of my families safety and no help from authorities in getting them out and they knew all the loopholes to keep stringing me along to the tune of about $10k in rent not to mention damage. He had long lost his licence by his own admission - 'I had some rent but don't have a licence' - and yet i would constantly see him driving ( I lived in the same area) and often doing burnouts, bald tyres etc. He would seem to constantly get locked up and released - the last few times with gps ankle band and would need to provide urine samples when checking in (his mother later telling me he would buy urine over the internet or get his sons). Each time he would have a court order releasing him to my house with no checks from court that he didn't have a lease or own the place. One of the last times he knocked off a music store and he argued it wasn't him to police despite them placing him by gps in the music store. Neighbours told me the police needed two vans to get all the instruments out of the house. At some stage after that he tried to give me a guitar with a $15,000 tag on it - told me the police had to give it back to him because it wasn't on the music store inventory but had their tag. He told me it wasn't so bad going back to prison, lots of worries go away and caught up with old mates and then would always say, but not anymore, I'm going straight now. Each time he got locked up the house would get trashed - word goes out he is in and the boys come around and search for cash and drugs. The torture finally ended when alerted from a neighbour that nobody was home for days and the pitbull in the backyard was barking and looking hungry. I called his mother who said he was locked up and really gone this time. She agreed to clear his stuff - which means take anything of value and leave a mess for me to clean up - a clearly wealthy woman and i can't complain too much because she did help me to break the chain. As it happened, I had just been made redundant - talked to the accountant and he said pull it down (was pretty stuffed by then anyway) sell the land and cop the capital gain while my income was low. Without being able to find a demo firm that would salvage all this Oregon and Jarrah in the house, i decided to demolish it myself by hand. And there I was a few months later, unemployed, chucking roof tiles down by hand and he turns up proudly announcing he had a chefs apprenticeship, something he always wanted to do and the same old line.... 'I'm going straight now"!

Our family survived and of course it could be worse. We tried to shield our young kids as much as we could but we tried to explain it to them that the tenants were doing the wrong thing but all our actions, even the bad judgements were made trying to do the right things by others, trying to help them. I'm not even looking for empathy, let alone sympathy and just used this to explain my experience where Wardy was querying what are appropriate penalties. And I don't need anyone to tell me all would have been solved if i had an agent - can give examples of mates where that hasn't worked either with these sorts of people. I did have over 10 years with varying good tennants and then it was my caring for others that saw me come unstuck. But it left me with the conclusion that it is only money that drives the whole system. If you have money and can pay fines, then you will be targeted and with ever increasing fines. If you don't have money then you can continue to drive and offend and they will do everything in their power to keep you out of prison because that will cost them money. Speed cameras are efficient in collecting money and can't be disputed, blood alcohol similar and you can always defend it because we all know that really drunk drivers and speeders kill innocent people. Yet everyday I see people distracted and on mobile phones, but that takes more effort.

And the original question - does the penalty match the crime. I'm not saying breaking laws is a good thing or should go unpunished but surely the main point of the punishment is to prevent a repeat of the offence. Cut someones hands off and they are unlikely to steal again but maybe something less would also have that same effect. First offence and would the shock of it all, a fine and some licence restriction see Wardy never do it again. Just introducing random breath tests was enough to never see me drink drive again. My tenant.... I don't need a licence to drive and I can do anything i like and get away with it - what would actually take to change his behaviour now? I think the solution is judges that can make decent decisions and not mandatory sentencing. The mandatory stuff just makes their job easy. Judges that understand people and can work out what it takes to change behaviour - not that i am saying that is easy and make the grade and you should be paid a good salary for that. Fine Wardy and probably could say to him zero tolerance and even zero alcohol - but keep your job and house and I am guessing from what has been said and he would say thankyou and never do it again. But keep releasing repeat offenders and obviously that don't work and blind freddy could work that out.

Glad i got that off my chest!