24 points on the license and still driving

[[XAP]Bob]

I must put up my hand to having been inaccurate above when Isaid that the law on special reasons had been changed to include the circumstances of the driver. This is not quite correct, in that the change was to allow 'exceptional hardship' as a reason for not disqualifying. Bearing in mind that courts regularly accepted hardship arguments when they were not allowed to do so, I cannot imagine that they are any tougher on this now that they are allowed to do it. I've done no prosecuting since 1984 so I've no recent first hand experience but I seem to see plenty of reports of footballers, jockeys and the like escaping disqualification because they need a licence as part of the job . Here's an explanation of the law from a firm of specialist solicitors:

http://www.driving-law.co.uk/offences/d ... sp#special

Didn't realise footballers were now so soft that they need to drive around the pitch in case someone comes near them?

[Phil_Lee]

To my mind, the "exceptional hardship" argument is both overused and far too readily accepted.
It is quite clearly the intention of the legislation that the risk of losing a job is part of the expected hardship, and is not exceptional in any way.
This is reinforced by government advertising on the subject, and magistrates who allow "but I'll lose my job" as a plea of exceptional hardship are making up the law, not administering it.

"Exceptional" should be reserved for cases where the hardship goes well above and beyond having to find a new job within cycling or walking range, or on a bus route.

[dave holladay]

No real argument for 'exceptional hardship' if you cannot hold a driving licence you can still do most jobs - you simply have to travel in a different way - and the penalty for an offence that takes you over the limit can include the cost of paying for someone to drive you - it could even be factored in to the fines tariff.

Remember that most top executives, supermodels, pop stars, and footballers (or those with brains) value their time too highly to waste it driving - just observe - they all have someone to drive them around - simple, and something quite easy to impose on someone who gets an automatic ban for driving offences. In this way the bench will cease to be seen as a laughing stock when they defer to such appeals of "But I need a driving licence for my work" - rubbish! You'll have to learn by having to pay for someone to drive you around - bus drivers come quite cheap when you share the cost with 70 other passengers.

[[XAP]Bob]

No real argument for 'exceptional hardship'

If you're disabled and live in the countryside with a weekly bus service then I can see forced sale of the car to provide an electrically assisted trike...

But otherwise...

[workhard]

I have recently developed an addiction to the show "Traffic Cops". A mate is on it regularly, as is a cousin sometimes and one of my-in-laws.

How it makes me laugh when at the end young Mr Theakston, or whoever, solelmny intone "CPS declined to prosecute", "was let off with a caution" but my most hearty belly laughs are reserved for "was found guilty of driving without a licence, MoT, or insurance and was banned for 24 months". Yep. That will stop them driving for sure.

[hubgearfreak]

"Exceptional" should be reserved for cases

i dont agree - it shouldn't even be recognised. the motorist who's proven themselves several times to be too reckless to drive, shouldn't be doing so.

whatever their "exceptional hardship" is going to be,

a. they knew it was coming.
b. it's not as much of an "exceptional hardship" as the impact on someones elses family of losing their son/mum/brother/daughter

[[XAP]Bob]

"Exceptional" should be reserved for cases

i dont agree - it shouldn't even be recognised. the motorist who's proven themselves several times to be too reckless to drive, shouldn't be doing so.

whatever their "exceptional hardship" is going to be,

a. they knew it was coming.
b. it's not as much of an "exceptional hardship" as the impact on someones elses family of losing their son/mum/brother/daughter

First offence hitting high points count then it should be allowed (i.e. managed to set off all the speed cameras on the M1 in one journey...)
But no subsequent offences...