Thread: About to lose my licence

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.

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

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

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.

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...

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?